/zn 

% 


v/ 

REVIEW 


OF  THF 


of  tjje  5  cjmtatifltt  to  ftt&k 


REPRINTED  FROM  THE  PRESBYTERIAN  QUARTERLY  REVIEW. 


?  Q/b  & 


PHILADELPHIA: 

HENRY  B.  ASHMEAD,  BOOK  AND  JOB  PRINTER, 


GEORGE  STREET  ABOVE  ELEVENTH. 

1856. 


/ 

A  REVIEW 


OF  THE 


fnbia 


REPRINTED  FROM  THE  PRESBYTERIAN  QUARTERLY  REVIEW. 


PHILADELPHIA: 

HENRY  B.  ASIIMEAD,  BOOK  AND  JOB  PRINTER, 

GEORGE  STREET  ABOVE  ELEVENTH. 

1856. 


10  1921 


■ 


■■■■•■•  '  ■  ■  v  ifvtt.-  •  ■ 


. 


Report  or  the  Deputation  to  the  India  Missions,  made  to 
the  American  Board  of  Commissioners  for  foreign  Missions ,  at 
a  special  Meeting ,  held  at  Albany ,  N.  Y,  March  5,  1856. 
Printed  for  the  Use  of  the  Board.  Boston  :  Press  of  T.  R.  Mar- 
yin,  42  Congress  street.  1856.  pp.  84.* 

Rarely  has  the  attention  of  the  Christian  public  been  called 
to  a  document  of  such  interest  as  that  whose  title  heads  our 
Article.  Whether  we  look  at  the  high  source  whence  it  comes, 
or  the  occasion  which  produced  it,  or  the  topics  it  discusses,  its 
importance  is  of  the  first  magnitude.  If  correct  in  its  facts  and 
reasonings,  it  is  plainly  destined  to  exert  a  decided  influence 
upon  our  mission  policy,  for  a  long  time  to  come.  Our  purpose 
is  to  examine  what  claims  it  has  to  our  acceptance. 

Two  reasons  operate  in  advance  to  create  distrust.  One  is 
the  ex  parte  character  of  the  Report.  It  is  virtually  a  plea  put 
forth  in  self-defence.  We  cannot  regard  it  otherwise  in  the 
circumstances.  The  Deputation  appeared  before  the  meeting 
at  Albany  to  give  an  account  of  proceedings,  which  had  been 
extensively  called  in  question.  Tidings  of  “revolution”  from 
the  Missions  they  had  visited,  had  taken  the  whole  community 
by  surprise.  Many  were  sorely  pained  to  hear  that  institutions, 
for  which  they  had  long  contributed  and  prayed,  were  either 
summarily  done  away  with  or  badly  crippled.  And  numbers, 
whose  confidence  had  never  trembled  before,  now  felt  serious 
apprehensions  at  the  appearance  of  an  extraordinary  assump¬ 
tion  of  power,  which  seemed  both  unwarranted  and  dangerous. 
A  state  of  affairs  thus  critical  called  for  explanation.  The 
Deputation  were  summoned  to  state  what  had  been  done,  and 
with  this,  to  establish  the  wisdom  and  propriety  of  their  pro- 

*  This  Review  has  been  approved  by  three  returned  missionaries  from 
Ceylon. 


4 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


ceedings.  It  was  a  difficult  position.  In  plain  terms,  they 
were  as  defendants,  set  to  plead  their  own  cause,  and  obtain  as 
best  they  could  a  verdict  in  their  own  favor.  A  rare  marvel 
it  would  have  been,  if  in  the  prosecution  of  this  task  they  had 
maintained  a  strict  impartiality.  We  do  not  look  for  such  dis¬ 
interestedness  in  the  best  of  men.  We  can  hardly  expect  it  in 
our  honored  Deputation.  4 

The  other  reason  alluded  to,  is  that  men  are  seldom  fair 
judges  of  their  own  conduct.  Their  self-consciousness  does  not 
reflect  them  truly.  Especially  is  this  the  case,  if  they  happen 
to  be  men  of  strong  opinions  and  determined  will.  Such  per¬ 
sons  rarely  estimate  aright  the  momentum  of  their  own  move¬ 
ments.  Confident  of  their  correctness,  and  honest  in  their 
aims,  they  are  often  betrayed  by  their  strength  of  purpose  into 
modes  of  speaking  and  acting,  that  appear  at  times  a  little 
arbitrary,  and  even  overbearing.  Thus  do  they  become  guilty 
of  an  unintended  violence,  and  none  are  more  surprised  than 
they,  wdien  told  of  the  injury  done. 

Erom  the  fault  here  indicated,  it  is  to  be  feared  the  Deputa¬ 
tion  were  not  wholly  exempt.  They  are  known  to  be  men  of 
rare  decision,  energy  and  perseverance.  With  the  senior 
member  in  particular,  these  natural  traits  have  acquired  large 
development  in  that  commanding  position  he  has  long  so  ably 
held.  By  constitution  and  habit  he  is  a  master-spirit.  Eor 
years,  in  the  judgment  of  both,  had  a  change  of  policy  through¬ 
out  the  India  Missions  seemed  desirable.  The  auspicious  mo¬ 
ment  at  length  arrived  for  carrying  this  change  into  effect. 
Armed  by  the  Prudential  Committee  with  ample  discretionary 
powers  for  inquiry  and  direction,  they  are  sent  forth  on  their 
desired  enterprise,  enjoying  the  freest  scope  for  adjusting  all 
things  to  their  liking.  No  opportunity  could  have  been  more 
favorable,  or  tempting,  for  the  exercise  of  a  spiritual  general¬ 
ship. 

Besides,  a  stress  was  upon  them.  The  work  was  great. 
An  extensive  region  had  to  be  traversed.  Propitious  seasons 
were  to  be  improved  at  the  right  places.  Long  delay  any¬ 
where  was  out  of  the  question.  What  was  to  be  done  had 
to  be  done  quickly.  Thus  did  the  force  of  circumstances  con¬ 
spire  with  the  force  of  character  to  impart  an  impetus  to  their 


5 


The  Deputation  to  India. 

movements  ;  and  it  was  hardly  in  the  nature  of  things  for  them 
not  to  have  borne  somewhat  strenuously  against  natures  un¬ 
nerved  and  debilitated  by  a  long  residence  in  a  torrid  zone. 
Indeed,  knowing  as  we  do  the  working  of  things  in  India,  we 
cannot  avoid  surprise  at  the  rapid  progress  made  by  the  Depu¬ 
tation,  and  at  the  amount  of  business  they  performed.  It  is  no 
wonder  that  a  friend  writes  :  “  The  fact  is,  the  brethren  found 
it  hard  and  trying  to  attend  the  meetings  of  the  Mission  daily, 
during  the  month  of  the  Deputation’s  visit  here.”  In  such  cir¬ 
cumstances,  how  easy  it  was  for  the  missionaries  to  yield  to  the 
firm  suggestions  of  persons  authorized  to  assume  the  responsi¬ 
bility,  may  be  readily  conceived.  We  submit,  therefore,  that 
the  Deputation  were  hardly  in  a  condition  accurately  to  state 
what  amount  of  influence  they  had  exerted,  and  how  far  the 
missionaries  were  cordial  and  free  in  their  actions.  It  was  as 
if  a  strong  wind  should  sweep  through  a  grove,  and  one  should 
mistake  the  bending  of  the  branches  under  its  mighty  rush,  for 
a  graceful  and  willing  obeisance  to  the  spirit  that  was  directing 
its  swift  courses. 

Whether  these  anticipations  are  justified,  will  be  seen  as  -we 
advance. 

The  narrow  limits  of  our  Article  will  prevent  our  following 
the  Deputation  through  their  whole  course.  We  shall,  there¬ 
fore,  confine  our  criticisms  to  that  portion  of  the  Report  which 
treats  of  the  Ceylon  Mission.  It  is  on  this  field  that  confessedly 
the  greatest  changes  were  made.  It  was  in  reference  to 
these  that  exceptions  were  first  taken  at  Utica.  And  what  was 
done  here,  may  be  regarded  as  fairly  illustrating  the  methods 
adopted  and  the  principles  carried  out  in  other  Missions. 

Our  first  inquiry  naturally  touches  the  objects  aimed  at  in 
the  appointment  of  the  Deputation.  What  was  it  that  the  Pru¬ 
dential  Committee  proposed  to  accomplish  by  this  measure  ? 
In  seeking  an  answer  to  this  question,  we  may  fairly  look  for 
the  mention  of  some  important  benefit,  which  could  have  been 
secured  in  no  other  way;  a  benefit  which  should  be,  in  some 
degree,  proportionate  to  the  large  outlay  of  time  and  means 
incurred  in  obtaining  it.  To  send  off  two  men,  occupying  the 
important  positions  held  by  the  Deputation  at  home,  across  half 
the  globe,  to  be  absent  eighteen  months,  at  an  expense  of  over 


6 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


$8,000,  is  an  expedient  "which  can  he  warranted  only  by  the 
promise  of  a  good  remuneration.  Now  what  was  the  great  thing 
contemplated  ? 

Lest  any  personal  motive  should  he  suspected  of  having  ope¬ 
rated  in  the  affair,  we  are  expressly  told  at  the  outset,  that 
“  when  the  Deputation  went  forth,  and  for  many  years  before, 
there  was  no  point  in  controversy  between  the  Mission  House 
and  any  of  the  India  Missions.”  Language  must  here  have  been 
employed  in  an  original  sense,  if  it  was  intended  to  express  the 
whole  truth  in  the  case  noted.  What  peculiar  meaning  the 
Deputation  would  attach  to  the  word  “  controversy,”  we  cannot 
pretend  to  say.  But  certain  it  is,  that  there  has  long  been  a 
decided  antagonism  of  views  and  opinions  between  the  senior 
Secretary  and  the  Jaffna  missionaries,  upon  several  points  of 
mission  policy  pursued  by  the  latter.  This  is  a  fact  so  patent, 
and  so  well  established,  that  we  cannot  comprehend  how  the 
Deputation  should  have  attempted  to  disguise  it.  We  have  ac¬ 
cess  to  private  manuscripts  which  prove  it  abundantly,  though 
we  will  here  quote  but  one  extract  from  a  letter  written  by 
an  old  missionary,  who  sets  this  thing  in  a  clear  light:  “The 
Seminary  got  into  bad  odor  before  1844,  and  our  Secretary 
said  to  me  several  times,  what  he  afterwards  wrote  to  the  Mis¬ 
sion  in  answer  to  Brother  Poor’s  letter,  ‘  It  seems  as  if  every 
interest  must  be  sacrificed  for  the  sake  of  the  Seminary,’  or  to 
this  amount.  We  could  never  remove  this  prejudice  from  his 
mind,  though  we  could  show  that  not  one  in  eight  was  devoted 
to  it.”  This  certainly  looks  as  if  there  had  been  something 
very  like  controversy  on  one  topic,  to  say  the  least.  That  other 
matters  were  also  involved  in  discussion,  will  appear  as  we  pro¬ 
ceed.  Knowing,  therefore,  something  in  reference  to  the  state 
of  things,  as  they  had  actually  existed,  we  are  not  disposed  to 
give  the  Deputation  the  benefit  of  their  disclaimer.  It  is  im¬ 
possible  for  us  to  resist  the  conviction,  that  one  benefit  directly 
anticipated  by  them  in  their  expedition  was  the  settlement  of 
a  long  pending  issue,  in  which  one  of  them,  at  least,  had  been 
seriously  involved.  Indeed,  we  find  something  like  an  admis¬ 
sion  to  this  effect,  in  the  letter  of  Dr.  Anderson,  published  in 
the  Herald  for  September,  1855,  p.  259:  “We  came  to  Cey¬ 
lon,  as  you  know,”  he  writes,  “  with  expectations  of  missionary 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


7 


problems  bard  of  solution  and  practical  views  among  our  breth¬ 
ren,  not  easily  harmonized.”  In  reading  this  extract,  we  can 
hardly  avoid  the  suspicion,  that  the  writer  had  had  something  to 
do  with  these  differences  of  opinion  alluded  to  here ;  and  if  he 
had  not  directly  occasioned  them  by  his  “letters  of  inquiry,” 
that  he  yet  took  a  direct  interest  in  their  adjustment.  But 
whatever  may  have  been  the  facts  of  the  case,  we  know  that 
several  of  the  older  missionaries  regarded  the  coming  of  the 
Deputation  as  having  reference  to  the  existing  controversy  be¬ 
tween  the  Mission  House  and  themselves,  and  that  they  made 
preparations  accordingly.  With  some,  also,  we  know  it  was  a 
cherished  hope,  that  having  the  Deputation  on  the  field,  with 
the  results  of  past  labors  before  their  eyes,  they  would  be  able 
to  effect  a  conviction  in  their  favor,  which  they  had  hitherto 
tried  for  in  vain,  by  conversation  and  correspondence.  It  was 
this  hope  that  prompted  the  welcome  spoken  of  in  the  Report — 
a  welcome  which  was  still  extended  amid  many  apprehensions 
and  fears.  The  Deputation  know  what  evidence  we  have  for 
this  assertion. 

But  here  the  question  arises :  On  whom  is  the  fault  of  this 
controversy  chargeable,  if  fault  there  be  ?  Had  the  Mission 
deviated  from  the  plan  originally  marked  out  for  them  ?  or  was 
it  the  Secretary  who  had  changed  his  opinions  ?  Certainly  the 
change  could  not  have  been  in  the  Mission,  for,  according  to 
the  statement  of  the  Report,  p.  29,  a  statement  which  will  be 
noticed  again  hereafter,  “  they  had  been  following  one  track 
for  forty  years.”  Like  consistent  men,  they  had  been  stead¬ 
fastly  working  on  the  plan  publicly  discussed  and  sanctioned  by 
the  Board,  at  the  beginning,  and  which  they  had  always  heartily 
approved.  The  departure,  then,  we  infer,  must  have  been  with 
the  Secretary.  And  this  inference  is  confirmed  by  what  is  found 
on  p.  42.  After  speaking  of  the  hinderance  thrown  in  the  way  of 
permanent  congregations  by  free  schools  ! — the  Deputation  add: 
“We  say  this  with  perfect  recollection,  that  we  at  home  had  a  joint 
and  cordial  agency  with  our  brethren  here,  in  this  method  of  work¬ 
ing  the  Mission,  and  have  written  and  published  much  to  secure 
it  favor.”  Here,  then,  we  have  a  change  of  views  fairly  admit¬ 
ted  ;  and  that  this  change  did  not  take  place  in  consequence  of 
the  visit,  we  have  already  seen.  It  took  place  long  before,  and 


8 


The  Deputation  to  India. 

none  will  doubt  that  it  furnished  one  motive  for  the  Secretary’s 
excursion  to  India.  It  was  his  telescopic  vision,  spying  the 
land  from  far,  that  first  detected  seeming  failures  in  that  system 
which  he  once  had  approved ;  and  these  failures  he  now  felt 
constrained  to  point  out  in  person,  to  his  brethren,  who,  not¬ 
withstanding  all  his  previous  asseverations  from  a  distance,  had 
not  been  able,  with  their  closer  view,  to  discover  them  for  them¬ 
selves. 

Now,  it  may  be  asked,  have  we  not  arrived  at  the  real  secret 
of  this  movement  ?  Would  it  not  have  been  more  candid  for 
the  Deputation  to  say  frankly :  We  had  long  differed  from  the 
missionaries  in  our  ideas  of  a  sound  mission  policy,  and  not 
having  been  able  to  persuade  them  into  our  course,  we  went  out 
to  take  more  efficient  methods  for  setting  them  right  ?  Why 
thus  attempt  to  ignore,  or  disguise,  a  fact  which  after  all  shows 
so  clearly  through  the  veil  that  is  cast  over  it  ?  This  is  pre¬ 
cisely  the  view  taken  of  the  matter  in  the  public  journals  of 
India,  and  it  is  the  view  which  forces  itself  upon  every  person 
who  intelligently  surveys  the  history  of  the  mission  for  the  few 
past  years.  To  our  minds  it  is  plain  that  the  expedition  of  the 
Deputation  was  designed  as  an  effectual  method  for  enforcing 
a  long  cherished,  but  hitherto  steadily  resisted  “  theory  of 
missions.” 

But  let  us  look  a  moment  at  the  objects  of  the  measure  as 
stated  in  the  Report,  and  see  how  far  they  admit  of  being  sus¬ 
tained.  From  the  list  of  Instructions,  we  perceive  that  the 
Deputation  were  sent  out  mainly  to  gather  “information.” 
The  Committee  wished  them  to  ascertain  something  which 
“  they  had  not  been  able  to  ascertain  with  sufficient  clearness, 
either  by  correspondence  or  by  conference  with  returned  mis¬ 
sionaries.”  Now,  here  it  strikes  us,  is  a  marvel.  The  Com¬ 
mittee  wished  to  discover  something  which  neither  Mr.  Winslow, 
nor  Mr.  Meigs,  nor  Mr.  Spaulding,  nor  Dr.  Poor,  nor  Mr. 
Hutchings,  nor  Mr.  Hoisington,  nor  Mr.  Mills,  nor  Dr.  Allen, 
nor  Mr.  Burgess,  nor  Mr.  Tracy,  nor  several  other  returned 
missionaries  who  might  be  named — all  able  and  intelligent  men 
— were  able  to  communicate  to  them  in  a  satisfactory  manner. 
They  were  to  find  out  something  Avhich  all  the  missionaries 
moreover,  on  the  field,  in  their  united  capacity,  could  not  suf- 


9 


The  Deputation  to  India. 

ficiently  enlighten  them  upon  by  writing.  There  is  certainly  a 
mystery  here  which  we  cannot  solve.  Two  persons  are  deputed 
into  a  foreign  country,  of  strange  customs  and  speech,  to  get 
more  accurate  intelligence  for  the  Committee,  by  ocular  in¬ 
spection  during  a  flying  tour,  than  could  he  imparted  by  mis¬ 
sionaries  who  had  lived  and  labored  in  the  land  from  ten  to 
thirty-five  years.  Were  the  Deputation  so  vastly  superior  to 
the  missionaries  in  their  powers  of  apprehension  as  to  merit  a 
larger  confidence  in  their  observations  ?  Or  were  tin*  mis¬ 
sionaries  refractory  that  they  would  not  answer  the  inquiries 
put  them  ?  These  things  will  not  he  pretended.  What  then 
is  the  secret  that  demanded  so  costly  a  search  ?  What  more 
could  have  been  needed  for  the  guidance  of  the  Committee  in 
their  plans,  than  could  be  obtained  by  frequent  and  leisurely 
interviews  with  those  experienced  servants  of  the  Cross  who, 
worn  with  toils,  had  occasionally  come  home  for  refreshment  ? 
That  must  be  a  strict  supervision,  and  savoring  too,  somewhat, 
we  fear,  of  distrust  and  espionage ,  which  demands  for  its  ad¬ 
ministration  a  greater  minuteness  of  knowledge  than  these 
sources  afforded.  Could  not  the  judgment  of  the  missionaries 
have  been  relied  upon  with  safety  in  matters  of  apparently 
doubtful  expediency?  Was  not  the  responsibility  of  success 
mainly  with  them,  and  were  they  not  fairly  entitled  to  decide 
upon  the  means  they  should  adopt  in  their  labors  ?  And  would 
it  not  have  been  more  prudent  to  have  waited,  until  a  Deputa¬ 
tion  was  asked  to  assist  in  devising  the  right  modes  of  opera¬ 
tion  ? 

But,  perhaps,  our  difficulties  will  be  removed  by  looking  at 
the  points  to  be  investigated.  It  was  made  one  duty  of  the 
Deputation  everywhere  to  see  “  how  far  the  oral  preaching  of 
the  Gospel  is  actually  the  leading  object  and  work  of  the  Mis¬ 
sions,  and  to  exert  themselves  fraternally  to  encourage  the  de¬ 
termination  of  every  brother  and  sister  to  know  nothing  among 
the  heathen  but  Jesus  Christ  and  him  crucified.”  Oral  preach¬ 
ing  a  leading  object  of  Missions !  We  had  supposed  on  the 
contrary,  that  the  salvation  of  souls  was  the  leading  object ; 
and  that  in  achieving  this  result,  the  missionaries  were  allowed 
the  liberty  of  Paul,  to  “  become  all  things  to  all  men.”  But 
here  it  would  seem  as  if  the  means  were  converted  into  an  end, 


10 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


and  insisted  upon,  regardless  of  results.  Waving,  however, 
such  criticism  for  the  present,  it  may  be  asked,  why  this  great 
anxiety  about  oral  preaching?  Was  there  ground  for  suspect¬ 
ing  that  the  missionaries  were  particularly  delinquent  in  this 
branch  of  duty?  Or  were  the  Deputation  so  eminent  in  this 
sacred  work,  that  they  were  peculiarly  qualified  to  inspire  others 
with  a  zeal  for  it  ?  Knowing  the  Jaffna  missionaries  as  we  do, 
and  having  learned  how  noted  they  have  been  for  indefati¬ 
gable  labors  in  preaching  and  visiting  from  house  to  house,  we 
really  cannot  believe  that  it  was  so  expressly  necessary  for  -two 
persons,  not  a  whit  in  advance  of  them  in  this  particular,  to 
travel  across  the  ocean  to  stimulate  them  in  oral  preaching. 
Would  there  not  have  been  as  much  propriety  in  having  the 
case  reversed? 

Again,  the  Deputation  were  to  inquire,  “how  far  the  Mis¬ 
sions  were  prepared  to  rely  upon  oral  preaching,  and  to  dis¬ 
pense  with  the  pioneering  and  preparatory  influence  of  schools.” 
We  are  almost  tempted  to  indulge  in  a  little  amusement  over 
the  very  nature  of  this  inquiry,  wondering  (e.  g.)  how  Mr. 
Pease  and  our  city  missionaries  would  look,  were  it  seriously 
proposed  to  them,  to  abandon  their  ragged  or  other  schools,  and 
rely  simply  on  preaching  efforts.  But  admitting  for  the  pre¬ 
sent  its  perfect  legitimacy,  we  ask  again,  were  not  the  mis¬ 
sionaries  qualified  to  decide  this  point  independently  ?  Did  it 
not  fairly  come  within  the  range  of  their  discretion  ?  We  must 
confess  we  do  not  understand  this  sensitiveness  about  schools ; 
this  desire  to  exclude  poor  heathen  children  from  the  benefit 
of  biblical  instruction,  except  it  be  on  the  ground  of  a  theo¬ 
retical  prejudice,  which  had  grown  to  be  no  longer  tolerant. 

Again,  the  Committee  were  anxious  to  know  “whether  mission 
schools  should  not  be  restricted  to  converts  and  stated  attend¬ 
ants  on  preaching  and  their  children” — that  is,  restricted  to 
those  who  could  best  afford  to  be  without  them  !  on  the  princi¬ 
ple,  we  suppose,  that  “to  him  that  hath  shall  be  given  !”  For 
our  part,  we  should  be  disposed  to  reason  in  precisely  the  op¬ 
posite  way.  Believing  that  those  who  had  become  Christian¬ 
ized,  would  have  within  them  a  stimulus  to  further  acquisition, 
we  should  be  the  more  prompted  to  bestow  our  attention  on  the 
poor  unfortunates  that  were  still  enshrouded  in  the  outer  darkness. 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


11 


If  distinction  were  made  anywhere,  it  certainly  appears  to  us 
that  it  should  be  in  favor  of  those  who  were  utterly  destitute  of 
true  knowledge.  Such,  according  to  our  notions,  would  be  the 
dictate  of  common  sense,  and  common  charity;  and  how  shall 
we  account  for  the  strange  inversion  of  this  mode  of  reasoning 
on  the  part  of  the  Committee  ?  Had  the  mission  schools  been 
purely  literary  or  scientific  institutions,  we  might  readily  ex¬ 
plain  this  nervous  apprehension.  But  when  we  reflect,  that 
the  chief  objects  of  study  in  these  schools  are  the  Bible  and 
Catechism,  as  is  fully  shown  in  the  Report  for  1852  ;  that 
they  are,  as  one  missionary  styled  them,  “  daily  Sabbath 
schools,”  attendance  at  which,  Dr.  Poor,  in  his  letter  to  Dr. 
Anderson,  calls  the  children’s  “golden  period  of  probation  for 
time  and  eternity;”  that  they  are  youthful  audiences,  always 
ready  gathered  for  the  missionary,  we  must  confess  ourselves 
at  a  loss  how  to  express  our  surprise.  Are  we  not  to  care  for 
heathen  children,  even  though  the  parents  should  remain  idola¬ 
ters?  None  but  a  man  hopelessly  bound  to  a  theory  would 
answer,  Nay.  But  conceding  again  the  rationality  of  the  Com¬ 
mittee’s  inquiry,  we  ask,  once  more,  was  it  so  profound  a  one, 
that  the  missionaries  could  not,  with  all  their  experience,  have 
replied  to  it  categorically  ?  and  could  not  the  Committee  have 
been  content  with  their  answer  ? 

But  not  to  linger.  The  remaining  topics  of  inquiry  were, 
the  expediency  of  establishing  collegiate  schools;  the  reason 
for  so  great  a  delay  in  putting  native  converts  into  the  minis¬ 
try  ;  the  propriety  of  furnishing  aid  for  the  erection  of  churches ; 
the  advisableness  of  reducing  the  printing  establishment,  and 
the  suitableness  of  having  the  correspondence  between  the  Mis¬ 
sion  House  and  the  missionaries  secret,  instead  of  free  and 
open  as  heretofore.  Such  are  the  main  objects  on  which  the 
Committee  desired  to  be  enlightened.  Now,  it  seems  to  us, 
there  is  not  an  item  in  all  the  list  which  could  not  have  been 
fairly  investigated  by  the  aid  of  returned  missionaries  or  by 
correspondence.  Matters  of  far  greater  moment  are  often  set¬ 
tled  well,  in  the  light  of  fewer  data,  than  those  constantly  in 
reach  of  the  Mission  House.  We  cannot  help  the  feeling, 
therefore,  that  there  was  a  certain  something  in  the  minds  of 
the  Committee,  or  of  the  Secretary  which  hindered  their  being 


12 


The  Deputation  to  India. 

satisfied  with  the  responses  that  came  to  their  inquiries  from 
abroad.  Their  appearance  is  that  of  men,  disappointed  in  the 
testimonies  of  others,  yet  so  confident  of  the  correctness  of  their 
theory,  that  they  must  needs  go  in  person  and  test  its  conclu¬ 
sions  for  themselves. 

But  were  the  Committee  sure  that  their  Deputation  were 
liable  to  no  mistake  ?  What  peculiar  facilities  for  knowledge 
had  they  which  the  missionaries  had  not?  Would  the  impres¬ 
sions  caught  during  a  rapid  survey,  be  more  trustworthy  than 
the  mature  convictions  of  a  resident  of  twenty  or  thirty  years 
standing?  Would  Americans,  just  arrived,  be  able  to  judge 
accurately  of  the  power  of  a  Tamil  sermon  over  an  audience  of 
strange  looking  Hindoos  ?  or  would  they  be  competent  to  de¬ 
cide  on  the  fitness  of  native  converts  to  assume  all  the  respon¬ 
sibilities  of  a  Congregational  church  organization  ?  Could 
they,  at  a  glance,  discern  the  beneficial  effects  of  vernacular 
schools,  or  instruct  veteran  missionaries  in  the  best  mode  of 
evangelizing  a  population  of  whose  peculiarities  they  were  prac¬ 
tically  ignorant  ?  With  all  their  investigations,  would  they  be 
able,  by  a  transient  visit,  to  ascertain  how  far  the  missionaries 
were  relying  upon  oral  preaching,  and  whether  they  were  wast¬ 
ing  time  in  alien  pursuits  ?  Who  does  not  see,  that,  for  all  the 
useful  knowledge  they  might  acquire  on  these  subjects,  they 
would  still  be  dependent  on  the  missionaries,  and  for  the  best 
of  this,  on  those  who  have  been  longest  in  the  work  ?*  Looking 

*  The  difficulties  in  the  way  of  correct  knowledge,  under  the  above  circum¬ 
stances,  are  thus  set  forth  in  an  extract  from  “  The  Friend  of  India,”  given 
by  Dr.  Poor,  in  his  letter  to  Dr.  Anderson,  by  way  of  caution : 

“Sir  C.  T.,  after  a  tour  of  three  months,  may  write  an  essay  on  the  Con¬ 
stitution  of  the  United  States  of  America.  A  correspondent  of  “  The  Times” 
may  even  run  over  southern  France,  and  as  he  goes,  obtain  a  life-like  picture 
of  the  vine-dressers  of  Bordeaux,  and  the  commercial  politicians  of  Mar¬ 
seilles.  But  an  English  traveller  in  India  cannot  acquire  even  a  partial 
knowledge  of  the  country.  He  has  all  his  ideas  to  unlearn.  He  has  not 
simply  to  comprehend  the  language.  He  has  to  discover  that  it  is  possible 
for  every  man  who  approaches  him,  on  every  occasion,  to  tell  an  untruth,  that 
rich  men  may  prefer  to  walk  barefoot,  and  that  every  attribute  of  respecta¬ 
bility  can  coexist  with  the  utmost  habitual  crime.  He  has  to  comprehend 
that  the  gentle  and  courteous  Baboo,  whose  phrases  are  all  of  abstract  virtue, 
or  whose  demeanor  would  do  honor  to  a  court,  has  ordered  a  village  to  be 
burned,  maintains  gangs  of  bravos,  or  is  an  habitual  suborner  of  perjury. 
In  short,  he  has  to  learn  the  great  truth,  which  Manchester  will  never  recog- 


13 


The  Deputation  to  India. 

at  the  whole  subject,  therefore,  there  is  hut  one  advantage  we 
can  conceive  as  attaching  to  the  Deputation,  and  that  is,  the 
opportunity  thus  gained,  of  culling  such  facts  as  suited  their 
purpose,  and  of  directly  suggesting  the  answers  which  they  de¬ 
sired.  How  far  this  opportunity  was  improved,  will  soon  appear. 

But  the  Deputation  were  not  simply  to  search  for  informa¬ 
tion.  We  read  that  they  were  invested  “with  full  power  and 
authority  to  give  such  directions  to  the  several  missions,  as  they 
shall  judge  that  the  best  interests  of  the  mission  demand,  in  all 
cases  in  which  it  was  their  united  judgment  that  the  exigency 
was  such  as  would  not  justify  delay  for  the  action  of  the  Pru¬ 
dential  Committee.”  What  the  Board  think  of  this  investiture 
of  plenary  power  over  its  ordained  missionaries,  we  cannot  pre¬ 
tend  to  say.  It  may  he  constitutional ;  hut  we  agree  with  one 
of  our  brethren  abroad,  in  pronouncing  it  “  a  most  extraordi¬ 
nary  fact  in  the  nineteenth  century.”  It  strikes  us  the  more 
so,  when  we  reflect,  that  it  was  done  by  a  body,  mostly  com¬ 
posed  of  laymen  annually  elected,  without  consulting  the  Board, 
and  in  reference  to  Missions  which  contain  some  of  the  oldest 
and  ablest  men  the  American  churches  ever  sent  out.  A  journal 
widely  circulated  in  India,  “  The  News  of  the  Churches,”  in  its 
issue  of  April  1st,  1856,  contains  the  following  expression  on  the 
subject :  “  Indeed,  the  Executive  Committee  is  openly  charged, 
though  all  Congregationalists,  with  exercising  higher  powers 
than  Presbyteries  or  Bishops  claim,  and  with  treating  the  mis¬ 
sionaries  more  as  dependents  than  as  ministers  of  Christ.”  We 
ask  our  brethren  whether  they  consent  to  these  assumptions  ? 

But  it  may  he  replied,  that  these  powers  were  conferred  only 
in  case  of  an  emergency.  True — but  how  liberal  is  the  con¬ 
struction  to  which  this  limitation  was  liable.  All  the  Missions, 
it  seems,  were  found  involved  in  this  emergency.  The  first 
news  heard  from  them  is,  that  the  revolution  was  accomplished, 
and  we  at  home  did  not  enjoy  even  the  poor  courtesy  of  being 
warned  that  the  thing  was  to  be  done — much  less,  of  having  our 
advice  asked.  Yea,  when  it  was  announced  at  Utica,  that  the 
changes  had  gone  into  effect,  the  officers  of  the  Board  declared 
the  thing  impossible. 

nize,  viz.,  that  society  can  exist  under  forms  unknown  to  political  economists, 
and  that  the  appearance  of  civilization  is  compatible  with  the  total  absence 
of  every  quality  which  endows  it  in  Europe  with  vitality.” 


14 


The  Deputation  to  India . 


But  it  is  replied  again,  that  the  action  of  the  Deputation  was 
subject  to  an  after  revision.  Granted.  But  was  this  a  suffi¬ 
ciently  effectual  bar  against  hasty  proceedings  ?  Every  one  un¬ 
derstands  how  serious  are  the  objections  to  a  counter-revolution. 
The  Deputation  well  knew,  that  if  their  desired  changes  were 
once  fairly  established,  there  would  be  small  likelihood  of  these 
being  ever  set  back.  And  here  is  precisely  the  pinch  of  our 
present  position.  Multitudes,  who  are  opposed  to  the  changes, 
now  question  the  propriety  of  countermanding  them ;  and  yet 
they  hardly  feel  willing  to  let  things  stand  as  they  are.  And 
was  not  this  a  difficulty  to  be  anticipated  ? 

As  to  the  precise  matters  in  which  directions  were  to  be  given, 
we  are  not  informed.  The  latitude  conceded  is  very  broad. 
All  we  are  told  is,  that  the  Deputation  was  “  to  do  that  for  the 
India  Missions  which  could  not  be  accomplished  effectually  by 
correspondence.”  The  language  is  very  significant,  and  opens 
wide  scope  for  the  imagination. 

But  was  there  no  danger  lest  this  endowment  of  power  would 
repress  the  freedom  of  conference,  and  impart  to  the  sugges¬ 
tions  of  the  Deputation  the  force  of  law  ?  Reason,  we  know, 
speaks  to  great  advantage,  when  it  is  seated  on  an  eminence 
and  gestures  with  a  sceptre.  Few  are  found  bold  enough  to  ar¬ 
gue  against  its  pronouncements,  when  these  descend  upon  them 
from  the  elevation  of  high  official  authority.  Should  the  Depu¬ 
tation,  then,  think  fit  to  utter  their  views  ex  cathedra  upon 
any  mooted  point  in  discussion,  what  was  to  prevent  their  ob¬ 
taining  a  ready  acquiescence  ?  Who,  of  contrary  opinion,  would 
venture  to  resist  the  voice  of  the  Board,  as  it  spake  through 
these,  its  delegates  ?  Or,  supposing  their  words  were  only  “  sug¬ 
gestive,”  how  would  a  missionary  be  able  to  distinguish  between 
“a  suggestion”  and  “a  direction?”  Were  the  Deputation  al¬ 
ways  careful  to  insert  parenthetically,  “We  speak  this  not  of 
commandment  ?” 

In  view  of  these  considerations  it  strikes  us  that,  if  the  Com¬ 
mittee  wished  to  get  at  the  real  opinions  of  the  Missionaries, 
and  learn  the  correct  aspects  of  their  fields,  a  more  impolitic 
thing  could  not  have  been  done  than  thus  to  convert  their  Depu¬ 
tation  into  Plenipotentiaries.  Our  letters  from  abroad  abun¬ 
dantly  evidence  the  inexpediency  of  such  a  proceeding.  Again 


15 


The  Duputation  to  India. 

and  again  is  the  authority  of  the  Deputation  given,  as  the  effi¬ 
cient  reason  for  much  of  the  recent  action  taken,  and  we  are 
even  told  that  in  their  eagerness  to  carry  their  measures  through, 
many  interposed  objections  were  summarily  set  aside  as  of  little 
worth.  And  if  such  statements  are  rebutted  by  testimonials  of 
a  contrary  kind,  our  rejoinder  is,  that  those  only  can  estimate 
the  force  of  the  current  who  attempt  to  push  up  the  stream. 

We  now  proceed  to  show  how  far  these  anticipations  were 
realized  in  the  Jaffna  district.  The  Deptutation  reached  Cey¬ 
lon  April  2d,  1855.  Seldom  has  the  mission  appeared  in  so 
dilapidated  a  state.  The  ravages  of  the  small-pox,  cholera 
and  famine  had  left  it  a  wreck.  Its  schools  were  mostly  dis¬ 
banded’;  its  congregations  broken  up  ;  several  prominent  church 
members  had  died;  and  one  of  the  founders  of  the  Mission  was 
no  more.  Besides  this,  nearly  all  the  brethren  were  worn  out 
and  disheartened  with  manifold  labors  and  losses.  Apparently 
it  was  a  most  unpropitious  moment  for  exhibiting  the  true 
workings  of  the  system  which  had  hitherto  been  pursued.  One 
might  as  well  have  attempted  to  judge  of  the  beauty  and  effi¬ 
ciency  of  a  ship  of  war,  after  it  had  been  brought  into  port, 
dismantled  by  a  storm.  Dr.  Anderson,  however,  in  a  letter 
published  in  the  Herald,  congratulates  himself  on  having  ar¬ 
rived  “just  in  the  right  time.”  As  we  regard  his  mission,  it 
must  undoubtedly  have  appeared  so.  No  situation  could  have 
been  more  favorable  for  inaugurating  the  new  theory.  There 
could  have  been  nothing  for  regret. 

Next,  it  will  be  instructive  to  observe,  how  the  conferences 
were  managed.  The  Deputation,  after  having  visited  the  sta¬ 
tions  separately,  we  are  told,  convened  the  Mission ;  and  what 
was  the  first  step?  Was  it  to  propound  inquiries  and  let  the 
missionaries  speak  ?  Not  in  the  least.  This  would  have  been, 
simply  to  have  opened  the  way  for  the  same  old  replies  which 
had  been  given  so  often  before,  and  set  aside  as  not  the  thing 
wanted.  With  the  view  apparently  of  obviating  such  a  result, 
the  Deputation,  as  the  Report  tells  us,  (p.  18,)  “  read  a  state¬ 
ment  of  facts  and  opinions  just  as  they  lay  in  their  minds.” 
Here  we  must  confess  is  a  specimen  of  excellent  tactics,  to  say 
the  least ;  as  a  shrewd  device  for  carrying  a  point,  nothing 
could  have  been  better.  But  what  shall  we  say  of  its  fairness  ? 


16 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


It  is  true,  the  Deputation  add,  “we  took  care  to  affirm  that  all 
we  then  said  was  merely  suggestive.”  But  of  what  avail  was 
this  assurance  ?  Such  a  disclaimer  of  intention  to  overrule  de¬ 
liberation  on  the  part  of  those  in  authority  is  a  well  understood 
form  of  courtesy  which  persuades  no  one.  It  is  the  soft  glove 
dressing  the  iron  hand,  the  force  of  whose  grip  is  just  the  same. 
If  this  imputation  he  repelled  as  severe,  where,  we  ask,  was  the 
necessity  of  occupying  a  position  which  rendered  this  precau¬ 
tion  needful?  Was  there  not  rather  a  direct  impropriety  in  it 
which  ought  to  have  been  scrupulously  avoided  ?  In  spite  of 
all  precaution  to  the  contrary,  this  preliminary  declaration  of 
opinions  was  inevitably  calculated  to  restrain  the  freedom  of 
discussion  and  give  a  biassed  result.  It  was  nothing  less  than 
an  index  put  up  at  the  beginning  of  the  course,  pointing  the 
way  for  the  docile  to  walk  in.  Or  as  one  terms  it,  “it  was  a 
bridge  cast  up  for  the  purpose  of  reaching  desired  conclusions.” 
To  affirm  that  it  had  no  determining  influence,  is  to  offend  our 
common  sense. 

But  to  proceed.  Twenty  days,  we  learn,  were  occupied  in 
discussing  twenty-one  topics  and  drawing  up  reports  upon 
them.  This,  as  every  one  must  concede,  was  rapid  delibera¬ 
tion — exceedingly  so ;  when  the  number  and  extent  of  the 
changes  recommended  are  taken  into  the  account.  Here  we 
have  at  the  outset  a  new  theory  sketched  in  regard  to  the 
“governing  object  of  missions,”  marvelously  resembling  that 
reported  before  the  Board  at  Hartford.  To  suit  this,  the  Bat- 
ticotta  Seminary  is  revolutionized,  so  as  to  render  its  suspension 
necessary.  Free  schools  are  reduced  in  number  and  conflned 
to  proselytes  and  their  children,  an  exception  being  allowed  for 
others  in  the  present  emergency.  The  Oodooville  Female  Semi¬ 
nary  is  reduced  to  a  size  proportionate  to  the  probable-  demand 
made  by  the  catechists  for  wives.  From  all  these  schools  Eng¬ 
lish  is  to  be  rooted  out,  and  those  supported  by  Government 
grants  with  a  view  to  instruction  in  English,  are  given  up. 
Besides,  the  printing  establishment  is  sold.  All  connection 
with  the  local  Tract  and  Bible  Societies  is  dissolved.  The 
principle  of  open  correspondence  is  abrogated,  and  the  ecclesi¬ 
astical  organization  is  merged  into  that  of  a  Mission,  acknow¬ 
ledging  no  court  of  appeal  save  the  Prudential  Committee. 
With  all  this,  a  new  church  is  organized,  and  a  pastor  examined 


17 


The  Deputation  to  India. 

and  ordained  over  it.  Such  was  the  amount  of  business  accom¬ 
plished  in  twenty-one  days. 

The  Deputation  tell  us  :  (p.  23,)  “  Great  unanimity  prevailed 
through  the  whole  meeting.”  “  It  was  the  result  of  God’s 
blessing  on  their  ovTn  experience.”  A  somewhat  different  view 
of  the  matter  is  given  us  in  a  letter  of  a  missionary,  dated  Feb. 
8th,  1856 :  “  In  regard  to  Dr.  A’s  statement  in  the  Herald 
as  to  the  unanimity  of  the  mission  respecting  all  the  changes 
made  here,  I  must  say  that  I  was  greatly  surprised,  and  that 
1  do  not  understand  wTe  were  so  unanimous  ;  at  the  same  time 
I  have  no  doubt  that  Dr.  A.  intended  to  state  the  matter  fairly. 
Certainly  the  mission  never  would  have  thought  of  making 
some  of  these  changes,  and  I  feel  that  the  Deputation  should 
assume  a  full  share  of  the  responsibility  themselves.”  And  the 
real  secret  of  what  unanimity  did  prevail,  is  hinted  to  us  in  the 
following  words :  “  The  Deputation  were  armed  with  great  power, 
and  we  certainly  were  not  left  in  ignorance  of  the  fact.” 
Plainly  there  is  a  golden  and  a  silver  side  to  this  shield ;  and 
it  is  well  for  us  to  take  a  survey  all  round. 

There  are  intimations  enough  in  the  Report  that  the  chief 
dissent  existed  on  the  part  of  the  older  brethren.  This  is  fully 
confirmed  from  other  sources.  Dr.  Poor,  before  his  death,  left 
his  testimony  against  these  changes  in  a  general  convention  of 
missionaries  held  preparatory  to  the  arrival  of  the  Deputation, 
where  they  were  in  a  measure  anticipated  and  discussed.  His 
views,  as  his  dying  message  to  Dr.  A.  declares,  “  were  well 
known ;”  and  we  have  read  the  memorandum  of  these  argu¬ 
ments  and  statements  which  ho  intended  to  lay  before  the  De¬ 
putation  in  person.*  With  him  there  firmly  stood  his  old  and 

*  The  cause  of  truth  here  requires,  that  we  say  a  word  in  regard  to  the 
extracts  given  in  the  Report  from  Dr.  Poor's  letter  to  Dr.  Anderson.  We 
have  read  that  letter  through  carefully,  and  must  say  that  the  whole  drift  and 
tenor  of  its  argument  are  clearly  the  opposite  of  those  which  the  extracts 
imply.  These  have  been  so  severed  from  their  explanatory  and  modifying 
context  as  to  make  the  writer’s  testimony  tell  in  favor  of  the  Deputation ; 
whereas  they  were  but  the  concessions  made  to  an  opponent  for  the  pur¬ 
pose  of  securing  greater  credit  for  the  adverse  opinions  maintained,  as  will 
appear  in  the  course  of  the  Review.  There  is  an  unfairness  here  which  im¬ 
parts  great  pertinency  to  the  following  inquiry,  which  we  discover  in  Dr.  P.’s 
“  Memoranda  “  Has  1  the  old  logician ’f  no  influence  over  Deputations  ?” 

t  See  Matt.  iv.  3. 


2 


18 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


well-tried  fellow-laborers,  Messrs.  Meigs  and  Spaulding.  They 
were  veterans  of  more  than  thirty  years  service,  with  their  na¬ 
tural  force  not  abated.  Here  was  to  be  found  the  real  expe¬ 
rience  of  the  mission.  The  rest  were  comparatively  young 
men — four  of  whom  had  hardly  enjoyed  experience  sufficient 
to  command  a  large  blessing  upon ;  two  having  been  in  the 
field  but  two  years,  with  only  a  smattering  of  the  language, 
and  two  were  laymen  having  no  direct  concern  in  the  matters 
revised.  The  one  longest  resident  was  of  thirteen  years 
standing.  We  mention  these  facts  simply  to  illustrate  that 
“  pressure  of  experience”  by  which  the  measures  under  review 
were  carried.  Computing  it  by  years  it  was  as  one  to  four. 
We  see,  therefore,  that  those  whose  counsel  was  best  entitled 
to  deference  were  against  the  Deputation,  and  were  simply 
over-balanced  by  numbers.  The  actual  pressure  was  that  of 
a  simple  majority  of  votes — votes,  which  we  venture  to  say, 
would  never  have  been  cast  except  under  the  countenance  of  a 
Deputation  assuming  the  responsibility. 

In  view  of  these  facts  we  humbly  submit  that  the  exigency 
in  which  the  Deputation  found  themselves  was  not  one  that  re¬ 
quired  haste ;  rather  it  plainly  called  for  delay.  The  Mission 
was  the  oldest  but  one  in  charge  of  the  Board,  and  contained 
a  large  investment  of  labor  and  funds  from  multitudes  who 
were  deeply  interested  in  it  at  home ;  and  these  most  as¬ 
suredly  had  a  right  to  be  consulted.  Its  system  of  operations 
had  been  extensively  wrought  into  the  general  structure  of  so¬ 
ciety  to  such  a  degree,  that  its  sudden  alteration  must  necessa¬ 
rily  have  occasioned  wide-spread  derangement,  disappointment, 
and  offence  abroad.  The  new  measures  proposed  were  adverse 
to  the  judgment  of  many  of  the  ablest  missionaries  in  other 
parts  of  India,  and  might  therefore  have  been  fairly  distrusted. 
And  finally,  we.  insist  that  a  particular  respect  was  due  to  those 
two  veterans,  who  would  be  compelled,  on  the  new  system,  to 
see  their  life-long  labors  disparaged,  and  the  fruits  of  their  ex¬ 
perience  set  at  naught.  Such  considerations  as  these  force  on 
us  the  conviction  that  the  Deputation,  far  from  precipitating 
these  changes,  ought  to  have  used  their  utmost  authority  in 
staying  proceedings  until  the  approval  of  the  Board  and  its 
patrons  could  have  been  obtained.  Their  haste  is  contrary 


The  Deputation  to  India.  19 

to  that  judiciousness  for  which  they  have  hitherto  been  sig¬ 
nalized. 

Such  is  the  history  of  the  doings  of  the  Deputation  as  we 
look  at  them.  On  reviewing  its  details  we  cannot  avoid  the  in¬ 
ference,  that  the  result  reached  was  the  object  distinctly  con¬ 
templated  at  the  start.  The  theory  which  governs  all  the 
changes  appears  in  every  section  of  the  instructions,  and  the 
whole  course  pursued  makes  directly  for  its  enforcement.  Watch 
the  movement  through,  and  you  see  it  going  straight  to 
its  mark — swiftly,  determinately,  without  faltering,  and  pro¬ 
ducing  everywhere  the  same  results — and  our  belief  is  irre¬ 
sistible,  that  an  anterior  governing  purpose  regulated  all  its 
issues.  If  the  Deputation  deny  this  conclusion,  strengthened 
as  it  is  by  many  other  testimonies,  we  can  only  say,  that  here 
there  is  presented  to  us  another  instance  of  “  unconscious  mo¬ 
tive”  which  we  would  commend  to  the  careful  study  of  psycho¬ 
logists,  as  a  new  illustration  of  how  “  fearfully  and  wonderfully 
we  are  made.” 

We  have  been  thus  minute  in  this  examination,  because  it 
assists  us  in  rightly  estimating  the  utility  of  the  movement 
under  review.  The  aim  and  methods  of  investigation  necessa¬ 
rily  determine  the  value  of  the  results  obtained.  Whatever 
undue  bias  rules  in  the  one,  inevitably  vitiates  the  other.  How 
far  this  has  actually  been  the  case  will  be  seen  by  considering 
the  motives  alleged  for  change  in  particular  instances. 

The  grand  argument  which  runs  through  the  Report  is,  that 
thus  far  the  Jaffna  Mission  has  proved  a  failure,  and,  therefore, 
stood  in  great  need  of  a  revision.  What  has  been  done  there 
is  styled  an  “  experiment” — valuable  chiefly  for  the  experience 
which  it  has  furnished.  It  is  also  termed  a  “preparation.” 
Again,  we  are  told,  that  “had  so  much  piety,  talent  and  labor 
been  employed  for  so  long  a  time  in  direct  preaching,  without 
schools,  we  should  have  been  ready  to  regard  this  Mission  as 
without  doubt  to  be  relinquished  for  some  more  productive 
field.”  Such  is  the  account  given  of  the  Jaffna  district  after 
a  mission  culture  of  nearly  forty  years.  It  is  not  surprising 
.  that  on  the  week  subsequent  to  the  Albany  meeting,  we  found  a 
reverend  corporate  member  knitting  his  brow  in  sad  perplexity 
as  to  how  he  should  counteract  the  disheartening  influence  of 


20 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


this  Report  upon  his  audience  at  the  next  Monthly  Concert, 
and  secure  his  usual  collection.  How  many  others  might  have 
been  discovered  in  a  like  predicament,  may  be  conjectured. 
Nor  do  we  wonder  at  the  exultation  of  the  godless  portion  of 
the  press  over  these  acknowledgments  of  inefficiency  in  efforts 
for  foreign  evangelization.  But  how  are  we  to  reconcile  with 
the  above  expressions  those  flattering  accounts  from  abroad, 
which  have  so  long  beguiled  us  into  the  belief,  that  the  Jaffna 
Mission  was  one  of  the  most  successful  under  the  care  of  the 
Board.  There  are  at  this  moment  before  us,  “A  brief  Sketch 
of  the  Ceylon  Mission,”  published  in  Jaffna,  1849;  also  the 
“  Report”  of  the  same  Mission  for  1852,  besides  some  subse¬ 
quent  accounts  in  the  “  Missionary  Herald,”  together  with 
numerous  letters  and  manuscripts  from  Jaffna  friends ;  and 
throughout  all  these  we  find  pictured  a  totally  different  aspect 
of  things.  “  Speak  we  of  failures  !”  writes  Dr.  Poor,  somewhat 
indignantly.  “  Let  us  go  to  Christendom — beginning  at  An¬ 
tioch,  Corinth,  Geneva,  London — to  New  England,  to  Massa¬ 
chusetts,  and  to  Boston,  that  ‘rebellious  city,’  both  on  Tea- 
totalism  and  Antiteetotalism.”  And  again,  speaking  of  the 
Hindoos,  he  says  :  “  But  though  they  are  such  a  race,  and 
partly  because  they  are  such,  we  place  a  very  high  estimate 
upon  the  investment  we  have  made  upon  the  mind  and  con¬ 
science  of  this  people,  and  render  devout  thanksgivings  to  God 
that  we  have  been  permitted  to  such  an  extent  to  preach  by 
teaching,  and  to  teach  by  preaching,  the  Gospel  to  every  crea¬ 
ture  in  our  mission  field.”*  We  might  account  for  the  adverse 
representations  of  the  Deputation,  partly  on  the  ground  that 
they  had  no  sufficient  data  by  which  to  form  a  correct  judg¬ 
ment  of  the  transformation  that  had  been  going  on  for  years. 
They  had  seen  nothing  of  the  past.  They  could  hold  but  little 
intercourse  with  the  natives.  Their  chief  basis  for  estimate 
was  a  few  general  statistics.  And  so  far  as  this  was  the  case, 
it  was  natural  for  them  to  be  misled.  But  what  if  numerous 
baptisms  could  not  be  reported,  and  flourishing  “stated  congre¬ 
gations”  pointed  out?  Does  truth  always  signify  its  progress 
by  a  flourish  of  banners  ?  Does  the  kingdom  of  God  come  • 
with  observation,  so  that  we  can  always  track  its  advancing 


*  See  letter  to  Dr.  Anderson. 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


21 


footsteps  ?  Are  no  triumphs  won  save  such  as  can  be  jotted 
down  in  figures  and  paraded  with  dclat  before  the  churches  ? 
None  will  assert  this.  Then  what  value  can  we  set  upon  the 
opinions  of  the  Deputation,  formed  from  their  cursory  survey? 
Notwithstanding  all  their  assertions  to  the  contrary,  we  have 
abundant  reason  for  affirming  that  a  wonderful  revolution  has 
been  going  on  in  Jaffna,  silently  and  surely,  both  in  the  man¬ 
ners,  public  sentiment,  and  religious  belief  of  the  people,  which 
greatly  alarms  the  Brahmins,  and  clearly  betokens  the  impend¬ 
ing  downfall  of  idolatry.  It  is  a  change  such  as  the  eye  of 
the  casual  observer  detects  not ;  but  which  a  comprehensive 
glance  along  the  past  forty  years  plainly  perceives,  and  joy¬ 
fully  recognizes,  as  a  steady  setting  of  the  whole  mass  of 
the  population  towards  the  ultimate  recognition  of  Christ  as 
Lord. 

But  on  this  point  we  have  even  the  direct  testimony  of  Dr.  A. 
himself.  In  a  letter  from  Madras  to  one  of  the  Jaffna  Mission, 
he  writes :  “  I  find  my  mind  tending  towards  this  conclusion. 
That  more  impression  has  been  made  by  missionary  labor  on 
the  Jaffna  people  than  anywhere  else  in  all  India,  that  has 
fallen  under  our  eyes.  A  great  work  has  been  done  in  Jaffna, 
and  I  look  in  vain  through  this  region  for  the  bright  intelligent 
faces  of  the  Oodooville  girls.”  We  thank  our  Secretary  for 
this  kind  acknowledgment.  It  soothes  some  wounds.  It  as¬ 
sures  us  that  in  his  more  candid  moods,  he  would  not  have  con¬ 
sented  to  abandon  the  Jaffna  Mission,  even  had  it  gone  on  as 
before.  But  it  sadly  damages  with  its  bright  colors,  that  dark 
back-ground  which  he  had  thrown  on  his  canvas,  in  order  to 
make  the  changes  he  had  introduced,  stand  out  with  more  strik¬ 
ing  effect. 

But  we  are  told,  that  “  the  Ceylon  Mission  has,  in  point  of 
fact,  followed  one  track  for  the  space  of  almost  forty  years 
and  this  is  attributed  to  the  “  natural  aversion  in  men  of  ad¬ 
vanced  life  to  change  long  cherished  habits  of  labor.”  Sur¬ 
prise  is  intimated  that  no  village  churches  had  been  organized 
under  native  pastors ;  and  even,  it  is  said,  that  until  of  late  the 
idea  of  doing'  this  was  not  fully  developed  in  the  minds  of  our 
missionary  brethren,  because  forsooth,  “  great  practical  truths 
usually  have  a  gradual  development ;”  and  not  a  little  credit  is 


22 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


taken  by  the  Deputation,  for  having  helped  in  the  first  act  of 
this  sort,  as  though  a  great  exploit  had  been  achieved. 

Furthermore,  complaint  is  made  of  the  smallness  of  the  stated 
congregations,  since  “in  a  population  of  one  hundred  and 
thirty  thousand  souls,  separating  from  the  congregation  the 
pupils  in  the  mission  schools,  and  the  persons  in  mission  employ, 
only  one  hundred  and  twenty-four  adults  remain  for  the  whole 
five  older  congregations,  who  are  not  members  of  the  church.” 
These  statements  and  intimations  excite  our  unfeigned  surprise. 
Who  that  knows  would  think  of  calling  such  missionaries  as 
Poor  and  Meigs,  Spaulding,  Winslow  and  Hoisington,  men 
of  mere  routine.  Ministers  more  observant  of  the  times, 
more  alert  to  the  calls  of  Providence,  more  facile  in  adapting 
themselves  to  occasions,  we  have  seldom  seen.  Constantly  have 
they  been  shaping  their  system  to  occurring  exigencies,  and 
the  history  of  their  w'ork  is  that  of  a  steady  organic  develop¬ 
ment.  The  idea  of  the  village  church,  so  far  from  being  a 
thing  of  recent  date,  has  been  before  their  minds  from  the  be¬ 
ginning.  Most  strange  if  it  had  not.  In  1847,  we  read  that 
a  “  Village  Church  building  fund”  was  formed,  at  the  instance 
of  Dr.  Poor,  “  to  aid  in  the  erection  of  neat,  substantial  stone 
chapels  throughout  the  Jaffna  district.”  On  the  plan  proposed 
six  edifices  have  been  erected,  where  catechists  have  held  stated 
meetings,  gathering  audiences,  it  is  estimated,  of  about  a  thou¬ 
sand  persons  in  all.  “It  is  our  design,”  says  the  Report  for 
1852,  “to  improve  all  favorable  openings  for  thus  establishing 
our  men  in  the  villages,  with  the  hope  that  they  may  gradually 
gather  around  them  churches  and  congregations  of  those  who 
shall  ultimately  themselves  be  ready  to  sustain  the  institutions 
of  the  Gospel ;  and  in  the  meantime  these  men  are  in  situations 
favorable  to  the  acquisition  of  that  strength  and  reliability  of 
Christian  character,  which  will  enable  them  to  meet  their  gra¬ 
dually  increasing  responsibilities.”  Furthermore,  a  theological 
class  has  for  some  time  been  in  process  of  instruction,  with  ex¬ 
press  reference  to  becoming  pastors  of  the  churches  w'hich 
should  be  formed.  These  things  certainly  do  not  look  like  fol¬ 
lowing  in  one  beaten  track,  or  being  fettered  by  old  fixed  habits. 
And  should  they  not,  we  ask,  have  been  accredited  to  the  Mis¬ 
sion  in  the  Report  ?  The  truth  is,  that  the  Mission  was  steadily 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


23 


arriving  by  regular  processes  towards  the  consummation  desired 
by  the  Deputation,  having  had  a  fixed  plan  for  it.  And  in  view 
of  this  fact,  Dr.  Poor  writes:  “For  the  Deputation  to  break 
in  upon  us  now,  would  be  like  rooting  up  the  young  corn  before 
it  comes  to  the  time  of  earing,  because  forsooth,  the  full  ears 
do  not  appear  at  the  time — mistaken  time,  expected.”* 

Now  it  is  true  that  stated  promiscuous  congregations  had 
not  been  instituted  in  the  form  they  assume  in  this  country. 
But  what  reason  had  the  Deputation  to  look  for  such  or¬ 
ganizations  thus  early.  Ecclesiastical  history  says  nothing  of 
them  until  about  the  third  century,  and  it  requires  no  great  pene¬ 
tration  to  perceive  that,  in  a  structure  of  society  like  that  of 
India,  unequaled  for  its  organic  unity,  compacted  together  by 
family  and  clannish  ties,  by  caste,  by  traditionary  occupations, 
by  national  customs  and  modes  of  life,  made  sacred  by  antiquity 
and  religion,  it  requires  the  whole  power  of  a  regenerating 
faith  to  detach  a  few  from  the  main  body,  and  cause  them  to 
assume  the  name  and  obligations  of  Christianity.  The  people  are 
not  easily  prepared  for  such  an  individualism  as  this.  Much 
agitation  and  discussion  must  prevene,  loosening  old  affinities, 
and  crumbling  the  consolidated  strata  of  the  population,  ere 
the  convictions  at  work  beneath  the  surface  can  force  them¬ 
selves  into  the  light  and  take  effect.  Men  of  the  world  will  ever 
be  governed  by  prevailing  fashions  and  customs,  let  their  private 
belief  be  what  it  may.  Especially  is  this  the  case  among  the 
Hindoos,  whose  sense  of  obligation  to  truth  seems  at  times  to 
have  been  wholly  deadened.  We  cannot,  therefore,  reasonably 
look  for  the  formation  of  promiscuous  congregations  at  this 
stage  of  the  mission.  The  thing  is  premature,  and  there  is  no 
propriety  in  construing  the  absence  of  it  into  a  token  of  the 
utter  failure  of  the  Gospel  with  the  people  at  large.  The  very 
fact,  that  six  village  chapels  have  been  successively  erected,  in 
great  part  by  native  funds,  is  a  more  correct  indication  on  this 
point ;  for  we  are  not  to  suppose  that  the  missionaries  would  have 
sanctioned  this  increase  of  chapels,  if  there  had  been  no  call  for 
preaching  stations.  Seeing,  then,  that  the  formation  of  churches 
had  long  been  directly  aimed  at  and  prepared  for,  what  more 
did  the  Deputation  accomplish  than  hasten  to  its  consummation 


*  11  Memoranda,” 


24 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


a  work  already  begun,  pull  open  as  it  were  by  the  band  a 
flower  just  blooming  ?  And  is  this  to  compensate  us  for  all 
the  expense 'we  have  incurred  ?  Was  there  any  need  of  special 
efforts  at  so  great  a  cost  for  “encouraging  the  Brethren  to 
carry  the  Gospel  into  the  villages,  and  in  such  a  way  that  its 
institutions  may  speedily  take  root  in  them,”  as  if  the  measure 
had  not  been  already  in  progress  ? 

But  there  is  one  measure  for  which  the  Deputation,  we  sup¬ 
pose,  will  exact  full  credit,  and  they  shall  have  it.  They  abo¬ 
lished  those  schools,  which  had  so  long  been  hindering  the 
spread  of  the  Gospel,  and  the  formation  of  stated  congrega¬ 
tions  !  We  have  already  seen  what  was  the  character  of  these 
schools  which  were  exerting  so  baleful  an  influence.  But  to  im¬ 
press  this  thing  more  definitely,  we  will  quote  the  following 
description  of  them  from  the  “Mission  Report”  for  1852. 
“  These  schools  continue  to  be  as  they  always  have  been,  Bible 
schools,  and  their  influence  upon  the  community  is  great.  It 
is  not  easy  to  determine  to  which  class  they  have  been  the  more 
important ;  whether  to  the  rising  generation  for  the  purpose  of 
imparting  to  them  elementary  and  religious  instruction,  or  to 
the  risen  generation  for  the  two-fold  object  of  preaching  to 
them  the  Gospel  at  the  school  bungalow,  and  of  visiting  them 
at  their  houses.”  Again  ;  in  his  letter  to  Dr.  Anderson,  Dr. 
Poor  speaks  of  them  in  the  following  manner:  “The  number 
of  schools  may  be  regarded  as  a  fair  index  of  the  extent  to 
which  preaching  the  Gospel  to  adults  in  the  several  villages 
wTas  carried.”  Such  are  the  institutions  which,  in  the  estima¬ 
tion  of  the  Deputation,  have  stood  in  the  way  of  stated  congre¬ 
gations.  We  are  tempted  to  ask,  Is  the  entire  structure  of  the 
human  mind  in  India  so  overset,  that  youth  there  is  not  the 
fittest  season  for  remembering  the  Creator?  Or  is  it  we  that 
have  been  deluding  ourselves  with  the  vain  belief  that  religious 
education  is  one  of  the  surest  means  of  securing  the  heart  for 
God  ?  The  Angel  of  the  Old  Covenant  bade  farewell  to  the 
world,  with  the  announcement,  that  “  the  hearts  of  the  fathers 
should  be  turned  to  the  children,”  by  way  of  preparation  for 
the  Messiah’s  Advent.  And  was  this  preparation  designed  only 
for  the  latitude  of  Europe  ?  To  our  minds  nothing  is  more  in¬ 
explicable  than  the  above  statement  in  the  Report.  So  con- 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


25 


trary,  in  fact,  is  it  to  reason  and  experience,  that  the  Deputa¬ 
tion  themselves  seem  to  have  forgotten  it  on  writing  the  57th 
page,  where  they,  with  singular  inconsistency  affirm,  “  You 
have  seen  that  one  of  the  main  inquiries  in  the  Madura  Mission 
was,  how  to  strengthen  the  large  system  of  vernacular  schools 
connected  with  the  village  congregations.  It  was  to  invigorate 
them,  and  through  them  the  congregations,  and  thus  to  lead  on 
the  gathering  of  village  churches  that,  &c.”  We  would  ask, 
Was  that  “intervention  of  schools,”  which  had  proved  so  disas¬ 
trous  in  Ceylon,  likely  to  prove  beneficial  among  the  same 
class  of  people  on  the  continent  ?  According  to  the  Deputation, 
the  history  of  Jaffna  “proves  the  insufficiency  of  schools  as  a 
means  of  securing  stated  congregations,  rather  than  the  im¬ 
practicability  of  the  field.”  Yea,  it  shows  that  schools  “stand 
in  the  way  of  the  congregation.”  Whereas,  in  Madura,  it 
seems  the  effect  of  schools  is  to  invigorate.  How  are  we  to 
reconcile  this  ? 

The  fallacy  of  the  Deputation’s  reasoning  is  thus  exposed  by 
Mr.  Spaulding : 


Tbe  expression  “schools  would  seem  to  stand  in  the  way  of  stated  con¬ 
gregations,”  was  the  stumbling  block  over  which  the  Deputation  stumbled 
and  fell.  A  greater  hoax  than  this  was  never  entertained.  The  whole 
hinges  on  the  assumption,  that  direct  preaching  efforts  must  secure  per¬ 
manent  congregations  in  a  given  time.  “You  can  show  no  such  congre¬ 
gations  ;  therefore  the  failure  is  to  be  charged  to  the  intervention  of 
schools.”  The  reasoning  seems  to  be  thus  :  “  Did  you  have  schools  ?” 

“  Yes.”  “  Did  you  have  permanent  congregations  ?”  “No.”  “  Ah  !  that’s 
it.  Because  you  had  schools.  But  did  you  not  get  permanent  congre¬ 
gations  where  you  had  no  schools?”  “Never.”  “Did  you  try  to  get 
such?”  “We  did.”  Did  you  not  succeed?”  “No.”  “What,  not  suc¬ 
ceed  when  there  were  no  schools  and  when  they  were  suspended  ?”  “No.” 
“  Then  without  doubt  your  Mission  must  be  relinquished  for  a  more  pro¬ 
ductive  field.  Schools  are  a  hinderance,  yea  a  liinderance  to  the  spread 
of  the  Gospel.  Out  with  them !” 

We  think  the  doctrine  of  the  Deputation  will  find  hut  little 
credence  with  the  school-loving  people  of  America. 

But  did  not  schools  divert  the  missionaries  from  the  great 
work  of  preaching,  and  so  operate  disastrously  ?  This  the  De¬ 
putation  imply,  and  so  many  have  inferred.  On  page  43,  it  is 


26 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


said  that  “the  converting  influence  of  the  Mission  is  and  has 
been  chiefly  through  its  boarding-schools.”  If  by  this  is  meant 
that  here  is  where  the  strength  of  the  Mission  has  been  ex¬ 
pended,  never  was  there  a  greater  mistake.  Not  more  than  one 
in  seven  or  one  in  eight  ever  gave  their  time  to  the  schools. 
The  Mission  “was  emphatically  a  preaching  mission,”  and  the 
main  work  of  its  members  was  to  address  congregations,  visit 
from  house  to  house,  and  proclaim  the  Gospel  wherever  they 
had  opportunity.  We  have  testimony,  that  in  the  course  of  four 
years,  one  of  these  old  missionaries  made  nearly  3500  calls,  by 
the  record,  among  the  villagers ;  reading  the  Scriptures,  and 
praying  from  house  to  house  in  order,  holding  also  neighbor¬ 
hood  meetings  wherever  he  went.  And  he  ascribed  his  free 
access  to  all  classes,  to  the  fact  that  he  found  the  pupils  of  his 
Mission  in  almost  every  family.  A  similar  work  was  done  by 
others.  It  is  a  mistake,  therefore,  to  assert  that  the  converting 
influence  was  mainly  in  the  boarding-schools.  Gospel  truth 
was  diffused  everywhere,  and  impressed  alike  upon  old  and 
young.  The  Mission  report  for  1852  speaks  of  “  daily  excur¬ 
sions  in  the  villages,”  “visitations  from  house  to  house,”  “fre¬ 
quent  tours  into  distant  places  with  encouraging  results,”  and 
“  village  meetings  on  Sabbath  afternoons,  numbering  from  ten 
to  fifty  or  sixty  persons.”  In  view  of  such  varied  labors,  we 
conceive  there  was  some  reason  for  a  missionary,  on  writing  of 
the  desire  of  the  Deputation  for  more  preaching  and  more  visit¬ 
ing,  to  inquire  “what  more  can  they  ask  than  has  been  done  ?” 
It  is  high  time  that  the  impression  which  has  widely  gone 
abroad,  that  the  missionaries  were  a  set  of  school  teachers, 
“taking  it  easy,”  was  corrected.  Certain  it  is  that  the  lack  of 
permanent^  congregations  cannot  be  charged  upon  a  want  of 
preaching. 

But  what  few  conversions  among  the  pupils  ! — “  only  thirty 
among  thirty  thousand,”  it  is  said.  On  what  can  we  charge 
this  lack  of  converts,  if  it  can  be  shown  that  the  Gospel  has 
been  faithfully  dispensed?  Shall  we  chide  with  God  for  with¬ 
holding  his  grace ;  or  shall  we  find  fault  with  the  toughness  of 
the  material  which  we  have  to  work?  May  we  not  rather  ask 
if  the  churches  at  home  have  not  been  defective  in  prayer  for 
the  needed  blessing  ? 


27 


The  Deputation  to  India. 

But  we  challenge  the  fairness  of  the  estimate  here  made.  The 
school  system  is  one  complete  whole — consisting  of  three  grades 
of  instruction,  and  must  so  be  judged.  The  vernacular  village 
schools  are  at  the  foundation;  above  them  are  the  English 
schools ;  and  over  all  are  the  two  Seminaries  at  Batticotta  and 
Oodooville.  The  most  promising  youth  found  in  the  first,  are 
carried  along  in  their  course  through  the  other  two.  Hence  it 
is  in  the  latter  that  the  fruits  of  the  early  blooms  are  to  be  looked 
for.  We  commit  a  great  wrong,  therefore,  when  we  undertake 
to  judge  of  the  village  schools  separately,  by  the  number  of  con¬ 
versions  which  have  taken  place  in  them.  The  work  effectually 
begun  here,  matures  elsewhere.  Indeed,  the  Mission  Report 
speaks  of  “very  many”  who  received  their  first  impressions  in 
these  schools,  but  were  taken  into  the  church  after  entering  the 
seminaries ;  of  sixty-two  baptized  after  leaving  their  course  of 
instruction  ;  of  others  who  had  given  good  evidence  of  faith  in 
Christ,  but  had  died  before  professing  it  publicly ;  and  of  eighty 
schoolmasters,  besides  the  parents  of  children,  who  had  been 
led  to  Christ  by  means  of  the  schools.  In  view  of  such  facts 
we  contend  that  to  condemn  the  village  schools  because  of  the 
small  number  of  conversions  in  them,  would  be  like  felling  an 
orchard  because  it  bore  no  crops  the  first  or  second  years. 

But  not  to  press  this  point.  Few  as  have  been  the  conversions 
in  the  schools,  it  is  proven  that  from  them  the  churches  have  been 
mostly  recruited.  Though  they  have  cost  but  a  small  proportion 
of  labor  and  means,  they  have  yielded  by  far  the  largest  results. 
A  missionary  writes:  “The  simple  preaching  of  the  Gospel 
among  the  people  of  India,  where  catechisms  and  Scripture  his¬ 
tory  are  not,  and  have  not  been  taught  to  the  children,  has  had 
thus  far  very  little  saving  effect.  So  far  as  my  knowledge  goes, 
I  have  not  seen  in  this  field  four  cases,  with  the  exception  of 
Navaly,  in  thirty-five  years.”  If  this  be  so,  our  argument  is, 
continue  the  schools,  if  you  wish  to  have  congregations — not  do 
them  away — not  find  fault  with  God  for  not  working  according  to 
your  theories.  “  Who  crossed  and  guided  the  blessing  hand  to  the 
head  of  Ephraim  the  younger  instead  of  Manasseh  the  elder?” 
asks  a  missionary.  “And  who  has  blessed  most  singularly  our 
seminary  schools,  and  bestowed  but  a  left  hand  gift  to  our 
preaching  and  touring  operations?  Who  is  Joseph,  that  he 


28 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


should  he  displeased  and  lift  up  the  blessing  hand  from  the 
favored  head  ?  And  who  are  we,  that  we  thrust  from  the  family 
the  younger  child  so  long,  so  visibly  and  so  wonderfully  blessed, 
and  declare  that  the  apostolic  first-horn  shall  be  the  heir  ? 
When  many  instrumentalities  are  in  operation  in  India,  who 
shows  which  is  the  chosen  one  ?”  These,  we  conceive,  are  per¬ 
tinent  inquiries.  They  impel  the  mind  along  a  most  instructive 
train  of  thought.  To  us  it  seems  as  if  the  Deputation  had  been 
undertaking  to  act  the  part  of  God’s  counsellors,  and  to  direct 
his  Spirit.  Their  abrogation  of  the  most  successful  instrument¬ 
alities  is  nothing  less  than  insisting  that  God  should  convert 
souls  by  their  own  methods  or  not  at  all.  It  is  carrying  out 
most  effectually  the  idea  we  exposed  in  the  instructions,  that 
oral  preaching  is  the  great  end  of  missions,  and  not  the  salva¬ 
tion  of  the  soul. 

But  the  fallacies  in  regard  to  the  Batticotta  Seminary  surpass 
all  the  rest.  We  have  already  seen  that  this  institution  has  long 
dwelt  under  the  shadow  of  the  Secretary’s  frown.  No  favorable 
position  to  thrive  in,  as  one  may  readily  infer.  In  a  letter, 
dated  1853,  Dr.  Poor  writes  :  “  And  if  I  were  uttering  my  last 
sayings,  one  of  them  should  be  1  if  the  Prudential  Committee 
are  not  by  this  time  prepared  to  patronize  the  Seminary  by 
adequately  providing  for  it  and  giving  directions  accordingly, 
it  will  fail  probably  of  accomplishing  the  objects  aimed  at  and 
which  I  believe  are  within  reach.’  ”  Similar  statements  are 
scattered  through  the  correspondence  of  missionaries  extending 
through  several  years  past.  Within  this  period,  the  opposition 
to  it  has  occasioned  a  great  reduction  of  its  members.  But 
during  the  visit  of  the  Deputation,  it  was  so  far  remodeled  and 
contracted  as  to  preclude  its  continuance  on  the  plan  proposed. 
We  are  told  in  the  Report,  that  “  the  suspension  was  resolved 
on  after  the  Deputation  left  the  island  and  was  suggested  by 
one  of  the  older  missionaries.”  The  remarks  that  follow,  inti¬ 
mate  that  he  approved  the  change.  In  a  letter  we  have  from 
him,  he  thus  explains  his  conduct  in  this  matter.  Referring  to 
the  suspension  he  says :  “  This  I  first  proposed  in  discussion 
for  discussion’s  sake,  but  really  because,  as  I  said,  I  would 
rather  have  nothing  for  ten  years,  than  to  have  a  half-dead-and- 
alive  thing  which  would  not  be  worth  anything,  but  be  a  tax 


29 


The  Deputation  to  India. 

and  a  disgrace  on  our  hands.”  We  perceive  from  this  extract 
how  important  it  is  to  look  at  the  reason  of  men’s  doings,  before 
we  venture  to  interpret  them  in  our  favor. 

Like  misrepresentations  pervade  the  whole  paragraph  upon 
the  Seminary.  For  example,  we  are  told  that  “the  purely 
vernacular  studies  of  the  three  classes  were  only  twelve,  while 
the  English  were  thirty-five  but  we  are  not  told  that  many 
of  the  English  studies  occupied  only  half  a  term,  while  some  of 
those  in  Tamil  were  continued  through  two  or  three  years — thus 
restoring  the  equilibrium  in  point  of  quantity.  We  are  told  that 
“  only  eleven  out  of  the  ninety-six  pupils  were  members  of  the 
Church  but  we  are  not  told  that  a  class  with  seven  pious 
members  had  just  graduated,  and  a  new  class  with  none  at  all 
had  just  come  in.  We  are  told  that  the  “  Seminary  had  been 
shorn  of  the  great  religious  strength  it  possessed  in  former 
times  but  we  are  not  told  how  the  “missionary  help”  which 
“  had  been  begged,  and  begged  again,  ever  since  1847,  had 
been  withheld,”  and  the  Principal  had  been  repeatedly  laid 
aside  by  illness.  We  are  told  that  “  the  evils  of  the  system  are 
stated  by  the  Mission  in  their  Report ;”  but  we  are  not  told  that 
these  evils  are  mentioned  only  as  tendencies  which  are  purely 
theoretical,  and  never  had  any  verification  in  fact.  We  are 
told  of  the  Government  servants  which  the  Seminary  has  fur¬ 
nished,  but  we  are  not  told  of  the  one  hundred  and  sixty  cate¬ 
chists  and  teachers  which  have  been  raised  up  in  it ;  nor  what 
great  help  even  the  unconverted  graduates  have  rendered  the 
cause  of  Christianity.  Much  is  made  of  the  “  earnestness  of 
Mr.  Hastings,  its  excellent  Principal,  for  these  changes  ;”  but 
nothing  at  all  is  said  of  his  brief  connection  with  the  Seminary, 
and  how  entirely  contrary  was  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Poor,*  and 
Mr.  Hoisington  and  Mr.  Mills,  who  had  for  years  been  in 
charge  of  the  institution  and  who  alone  could  fairly  give  the 
real  experiences  of  that  office.  Such  omissions  as  these  are 
fatal  to  the  accuracy  of  the  Report,  and  show  clearly  on  what 
misjudgments  the  Seminary  was  condemned.  We  desire  no 

*  la  his  letter  to  Dr.  A.,  Dr.  P.  thus  writes:  “  The  importance  of  our  Semi¬ 
nary  has  risen  of  late  years,  in  my  estimation,  thirty-three  and  a  third  per 
cent.  ;  if  we  would  be  as  wise  here,  as  people  are  in  America,  in  aiming  to 
raise  up  men  suited  to  the  times.” 


30 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


better  evidence  of  the  overruling  influence  of  a  pre-existent 
theory,  which  made  against  its  continuance,  than  we  have  here. 

One  fact  occurring  during  the  discussions  should  here  he 
known,  as  casting  light  upon  this  whole  subject.  We  here 
quote  from  a  reliable  correspondent.  “  It  was  proposed  to  the 
Deputation,  to  allow  the  Mission  to  plead  their  own  cause  for 
funds  and  for  literary  men  for  the  Batticotta  Seminary  ;  but 
the  answer  was  very  summary — 4  The  Board  will  not  allow  it, 
and  the  American  Christians  will  not  give  funds.’  The  natives 
also  offered  to  support  an  American  teacher,  and  one  of  them 
came  and  had  a  long  talk  on  the  subject ;  but  the  die  had  al¬ 
ready  been  cast  and  there  remained  only  the  doing  of  it.”  In 
view  of  these  disclosures  we  ask,  What  becomes  of  the  oft- 
repeated  objection  against  the  educational  system  derived  from 
its  too  great  expensiveness  ?  If  the  Seminary  could  command 
the  support  of  the  natives  under  the  general  supervision  of  the 
Mission,  why  not  let  it  stand  and  thrive  ?  Where  could  be  the 
evil  ?  Still  further.  What  warrant  had  the  Deputation  for 
committing  the  whole  Board  and  the  churches  at  home  against 
so  important  a  measure  as  that  proposed  by  the  missionaries  or 
the  natives  ?  Were  they  certain  that  consent  would  not  be 
granted  ?  that  funds  could  not  be  obtained  ?  that  the  whole 
country  would  be  unwilling  to  have  that  Seminary  take  root  in 
the  land  and  become  an  independent  source  of  religious  light 
and  knowledge  for  subsequent  generations  ?  Was  there  not 
here  a  fair  occasion  for  delay  and  reference  ?  Are  we  to  take 
this  as  a  specimen  of  the  Deputation’s  suggestions  ?  Queen 
Katharine  in  describing  Wolsey,  speaks  of  him  as 

one,  that  by  suggestion 
Ty’d  all  the  kingdom.* 

But  in  the  downfall  of  the  Seminary  we  have  reason  to  appre¬ 
hend  the  rise  of  a  positive  evil.  Having  enjoyed  so  great  advan¬ 
tages,  the  Jaffna  people  are  now  too  much  awake  to  the  importance 
of  education  to  submit  quietly  to  their  privations.  They  will  have 
instruction  somehow,  if  not  from  good  sources  then  from  bad. 
The  post  we  have  neglected  to  occupy,  will  at  once  be  occupied  by 
others;  “and  this  power,”  writes  Mr.  Spaulding,  “  which  has 
moved  the  foundations  of  the  devil’s  kingdom  in  India,  is  about 


*  King  Henry  VIII.,  Act  iv,  Sc.  1. 


31 


The  Deputation  to  India. 

to  be  turned  against  us  in  the  form  of  Bibleless  and  heathen 
schools,  and  a  pro-heathen  college.”  And  could  the  Deputation 
have  been  aware  of  this  ?  Let  us  hear  further.  “When  this  was 
represented  to  the  Deputation,  it  was  replied  coolly  and  sum¬ 
marily,  ‘  Let  them  have  them — -what  if  they  do  ”  To  such  sur¬ 
prising  results  did  the  logic  of  theory  force  the  Deputation.  A 
really  curious  thing  would  it  be  to  look  into  their  minds,  and 
witness  there  that  strange  mirage,  where  through  some  wondrous 
illusion,  the  familiar  forms  of  society  appear  so  singularly  in¬ 
verted,  and  the  very  foundations  of  the  social  fabric  are  turned 
up  afloat  in  the  air.  We  have  been  wont  to  suppose  that  Christian 
educational  institutions  were  fundamental  to  the  well  being  and 
evangelization  of  a  community.  But  these  the  Deputation  set 
adrift,  even  after  they  have  been  established  at  great  cost.  It  has 
been  commonly  imagined  that  one  of  the  surest  methods  of  prose¬ 
lyting  a  people  was  to  get  control  of  the  rising  generation  ;  but 
these  the  missionaries  are  bidden  to  let  alone  until  they  are 
grown  up,  and  can  be  gathered  into  “permanent  congrega¬ 
tions.”  We  wait  to  see  what  our  presidents  and  professors 
and  teachers  think  of  this  moral  topsy-turvy. 

To  this  exposition  of  the  Deputation’s  theory,  it  may  be  object¬ 
ed  that  they  have  left  yet  standing  twelve  schools  for  heathen 
children  in  Jaffna.  But  the  question  is,  are  these  an  exception 
to  the  general  policy  conceded  out  of  regard  to  the  past,  and 
eventually  to  be  done  away,  or  are  they  a  legitimate  part  of  it  ? 
No  one  can  doubt  upon  this  point,  when  we  are  distinctly  in¬ 
formed  in  the  Beport  on  the  “  Governing  Object  of  Missions,” 
that  the  work  of  the  Gospel  “not  only  acknowledges  no  neces¬ 
sity  of  any  auxiliary  means  or  preparatory  process,  but  is  actu¬ 
ally  retarded  by  a  resort  to  such  appliances.”  And  if  farther 
evidence  were  needed,  we  have  but  to  remember  the  inquiry 
which  the  Deputation  was  instructed  to  make,  and  which,  like 
all  the  rest,  anticipated  its  own  answer :  “  Whether  in  general, 
missionary  schools  should  not  be  restricted  to  converts  and 
stated  attendants  on  preaching,  and  their  children.”  Besides, 
our  interpretation  is  fully  corroborated  by  letters  from  the 
missionaries. 

Another  great  change  effected  was  the  general  eradication 
of  the  English  language  from  all  the  schools.  Inasmuch  as 


32  The  Deputation  to  India . 

very  strange  views  have  been  ascribed  to  the  older  missionaries* 
in  regard  to  the  advantages  afforded  by  the  study  of  English* 
it  may  be  well  to  quote  at  length  some  of  their  opinions  on  this 
subject.  One  who  may  be  taken  as  a  fair  exponent  of  the  rest 
thus  writes: 

Another  curious  argument  was  often  used  by  Way  of  a  question : 
“  Are  you  expecting  to  teach  all  the  people,  English  ?  Is  the  world  going 
to  be  converted  by  English?  Did  the  Apostles  learn  English V’  Now, 
these  questions  are  all  based  upon  a  mistake.  No  one  ever  thought  of 
teaching  the  masses,  English.  All  we  ever  thought  of  was  to  teach  a 
select  few,  who  should  take  the  lead  of  the  land,  and  who  should  be  able  to 
prepare  books,  and  to  teach  in  the  vernacular,  so  as  to  meet  the  demands 
of  such  an  education  in  the  various  departments  of  a  Christian  community. 
We  also  know  that  the  nation  is  Christianized  through  the  vernacular. 
But  I  have  yet  to  learn  that  foreigners  and  foreign  languages  were  not  the 
original  moving  cause,  as  a  general  thing,  in  the  first  introduction  of 
Christianity  to  a  heathen  land,  and  so  continued  to  be  until  the  power  of 
that  influence  had  taken  sufficient  hold  of  the  people,  or  of  their  leaders, 
to  carry  their  work  through.  Did  not  the  Greeks  Christianize  the  Jews, 
and  in  this  sense  did  not  the  Apostles  study  English  ?  The  Greek  was  the 
court  language  then,  as  English  is  now  in  India.  And  did  not  the  leading 
Jews  in  church,  in  state,  in  the  army,  from  Egypt  round  through  Baby¬ 
lon,  Assyria,  Asia  Minor,  and  even  to  Rome,  study  Greek  and  unite  the 
morals  of  the  Hebrew  with  copious  and  scientific  Greek  ?  There  is  no 
doubt  on  this  point.  And  it  should  be  kept  in  mind  that  Jews  were  pro¬ 
moted  to  the  highest  offices  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  Ptolemies  and  Syrian 
Kings.  Now,  if  the  English  educating  power  has  attained  sufficient 
Christian  and  Christianizing  stability  to  carry  on  the  work  in  India,  well 
and  good.  But  this  is  the  simple  question,  and  here  the  whole  contro¬ 
versy  hinges.  If  English  Christian  education  has  attained  this  power 
over  India,  so  as  to  control  the  masses,  then  we  may  safely  drop  it.  If 
not,  then  we  lose  the  whole,  and  the  stone  rolled  up  the  mountain  turns 
back  upon  us,  and  the  work  is  lost.  We  all  agree  that  the  masses  must 
be  operated  upon  by  the  vernacular  only,  but  we  differ  as  to  the  import¬ 
ance  and  strength  of  the  moving  human  power  at  the  present  day  in 
India.  English  has  taken  the  lead  thus  far  here,  and  in  every  land  this 
foreign  power  has  and  must  take  the  lead  at  first,  and  must  continue  (so 
it  did  in  the  days  of  the  Apostles)  until  the  wild  olive-branch  is  firmly 
united  with  the  stock,  and  becomes  the  vernacular  tree,  so  as  to  bear  fruit 
from  its  own  branches. 

The  profound  ideas  here  advanced,  show  clearly  the  mental 
power  and  great  wisdom  of  those  men  whom  our  Prudential 
Committee  have  undertaken  to  instruct.  They  fully  justify 
the  course  which  the  Mission  had  taken  thus  far,  and  prove  how 


The  Deputation  to  India.  33 

fitted  it  was  to  retain  the  control  of  the  whole  subject  still  lon¬ 
ger.  There  was  plainly  no  call  for  the  interference  of  the  Depu¬ 
tation.  With  such  views  governing  the  missionaries  there  was 
little  danger  of  their  “running  wild  upon  English.”  The  ob¬ 
ject  they  were  aiming  at,  was  eminently  in  the  line  of  their 
mission  work.  It  was  the  legitimate  improvement  of  one  of  the 
most  marvelous  preparations  made  by  Providence  for  the  evan¬ 
gelization  of  Asia  at  the  present  day.  In  the  spread  of  the  Eng¬ 
lish,  we  consider  there  has  been  furnished  us  one  great  advan¬ 
tage  over  the  first  preachers,  in  their  attempts  to  convert  India ; 
and  which  gives  us  the  hopes  of  a  success  which  they  did  not 
enjoy.  To  our  mind,  it  is  plain,  that  one  great  reason  why  the 
Gospel  failed  in  the  East  at  the  first,  was,  that  the  Oriental 
languages  had  not  been  prepared,  as  was  the  Greek  by  the 
Septuagint  translation  and  the  discussions  of  the  Platonic  and 
Alexandrian  schools,  for  taking  up  and  properly  expressing  its 
glorious  truths.  The  words  employed  for  Christian  teaching 
were  never  thoroughly  redeemed  from  Paganism,  and  the  old 
meanings  kept  ever  blending  in  with  and  corrupting  the  new. 
This  fact  is  abundantly  illustrated  in  the  history  of  Manicliee- 
ism.  That  system  was  nothing  but  an  amalgam  of  the  Buddhist 
and  Christian  religions,  which  readily  ran  together  in  terms 
common  to  both.  Indeed,  so  strong  is  the  analogy  between  the 
two  faiths  in  many  points,  that  to  this  day  the  Buddhists  of 
Ceylon  claim  Jesus  as  one  of  their  Boodhs.  The  great  deside¬ 
ratum,  therefore,  in  India  at  the  first,  and  one  now  happily 
provided  was  a  mediating  language ,  by  means  of  which  the 
natives  could  clearly  apprehend  Christian  ideas,  and  then  work 
them  into  their  own  literature  by  a  natural  process  of  adapta¬ 
tion  and  explanation.  For  an  operation  like  this,  no  missionary 
is  ever  properly  qualified.  He  must  always  labor  under  the 
disadvantage  of  foreign  idioms  and  modes  of  speech.  If,  there¬ 
fore,  a  Christian  literature  be  had,  it  must  come  as  an  indige¬ 
nous  product,  and  we  can  only  assist  toward  it  by  impregnating 
the  minds  of  an  educated  class  with  Christian  truths  through 
a  Christianized  language.  And  is  not  this  the  very  blessing 
indicated  by  the  prophet,  “  Then  will  I  turn  to  the  people  a 
pure  language,  that  they  may  all  call  upon  the  name  of  the 
Lord  and  serve  him  with  one  consent?”  Such  a  language  God 
3 


34 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


is  now  kindly  furnishing  the  people  of  India.  He  has  awakened 
in  them  an  irresistible  desire  for  its  acquisition.  Our  wisdom 
is  rightly  to  perceive  his  goings  forth  and  follow  whither  he 
leads  the  way.  A  movement  thus  remarkably  begun,  it  should 
be  our  aim  to  conduct  to  noble  issues,  and  a  grievous  sin  were 
it  if  we  allowed  it  to  be  turned  to  the  detriment  of  the  Gospel, 
as  there  is  reason  to  fear  will  be  the  case,  if  we  fail.  “  As  for 
stopping  it,”  writes  Dr.  Poor,  “it  would  be  as  impossible,  as 
permanently  to  eclipse  the  sun ;  and  could  it  be  effected,  it 
would  he  as  disastrous  as  to  eclipse  the  sun.”  Why  then  should 
we  hesitate  !  Why  starve  the  cravings  for  knowledge  which 
we  have  awakened  ?  Why  force  hack  the  thinking  and  eager 
mind  upon  the  abominations  of  the  Puranas  and  the  Shasters  ? 
Why  limit  Christian  works  to  the  clergy  alone,  as  though  intel¬ 
ligent  and  cultivated  laymen  were  useless  to  the  church  ?  Is 
this  a  large  and  generous  policy  worthy  of  American  Protes¬ 
tants?  We  cannot  hut  feel,  that  the  objections  urged  in  reply 
by  the  Deputation,  are  wholly  unworthy  of  them.  We  cannot 
perceive  the  danger  which  they  apprehend  from  the  aspirations 
of  educated  natives.  We  cannot  persuade  ourselves  of  any  dis¬ 
astrous  consequences,  if  goatherds  and  palanquin-hearers,  and 
toddy-drawers,  should  rise  to  positions  of  influence  by  means 
of  a  thorough  Christian  education.  It  is  a  thing  most  to  be 
desired,  and  the  evil  accruing  is  small  in  proportion  to  the  be¬ 
nefit.  “A  score  have  been  elevated  to  one  being  injured,” 
writes  Dr.  Poor.  This  diffusion  of  knowledge  and  uplifting  of 
the  lower  classes  is  the  natural  effect  of  the  Gospel  everywhere. 
We  cannot  suppress  it,  and  the  problem  of  the  Deputation  ap¬ 
pears  to  us  to  be  nothing  less  than  that  of  seeking  how  to  leaven 
the  lump  without  letting  it  rise. 

We  cannot  hut  feel,  therefore,  that  this  relentless  crusade 
against  the  English  is  wholly  impolitic  and  unwarrantable.  It 
is  a  refusal  to  take  possession  of  and  sanctify  one  of  the  efficient 
powers  for  good  at  work  in  India,  and  in  so  doing,  it  appears 
to  us,  as  if  the  Mission  were  periling  its  influence,  and  coming- 
down  from  the  high  vantage-ground  it  has  hitherto  occupied. 
It  is  surrendering  into  the  hands  of  the  enemy,  positions  which 
it  ought  valiantly  to  maintain  in  command  of  the  whole  coun¬ 
try. 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


35 


There  are  several  other  topics  which  we  would  gladly  discuss 
had  we  the  space ;  but  we  must  hasten  to  glance  in  conclusion 
at  the  changes  made  in  the  machinery  of  the  Mission.  These 
are  all  characterized  by  one  marked  feature.  It  is  that  they 
favor  the  more  complete  control  of  the  Committee  over  the 
missionaries.  “Free  correspondence,’’  for  example,  or  more 
properly,  secret  correspondence  under  the  plea  of  securing  the 
greater  independence  of  the  individual  missionary,  endangers 
the  liberty  of  the  whole  body,  by  subjecting  it  to  a  covert  espi¬ 
onage.  The  declining  of  “  Government  Grants,”  contrary  to  the 
policy  of  the  other  Missions,  throws  the  missionary  more  exclu¬ 
sively  upon  the  resources  which  may  be  furnished  him  from  the 
Mission  House.  The  same  result  accrues  also  from  a  severance 
of  the  mission  from  all  local  Tract  and  Bible  societies.  But  it 
is  in  the  dissolution  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Organization,  and 
merging  the  powers  of  this  into  the  mission  body  that  we  detect 
the  most  serious  evil — for  here  we  have  a  body  so  constituted 
as  to  allow  of  no  jurisdiction  save  that  of  the  Committee,  which 
can  appoint  and  depose  its  members  at  pleasure.  Thus  we 
have  the  complete  subordination  of  the  missionary,  under  the 
absolute  control  of  the  Mission  House.  The  arrangement  is 
commended  in  the  Report  for  its  simplicity,  but  it  is  just  such 
a  simplicity  as  is  ever  favorable  to  despotism.  We  must  con¬ 
fess  we  dislike  the  system.  Its  lauded  excellence  is  its  chief 
evil.  We  would  rather  have' more  protection  against  the  Com¬ 
mittee  ;  more  liberty  for  the  mission  to  derive  aid  where  best 
it  can,  and  thus  try  expedients  which  the  Committee  may  not  be 
ready  to  approve,  and  more  direct  connection  with  the  ecclesias¬ 
tical  bodies  at  home.  Already  have  too  many  complaints  about 
a  stringent  control  reached  our  ears.  These  should  not  be 
multiplied.  The  missionaries  should  not  be  treated  as  the  mere 
employes  of  the  Board.  With  more  justice  we  might  regard 
the  Board  as  an  agency  emploj'ed  in  providing  support  for  the 
missionaries  as  they  go  forth  under  a  divine  call  to  execute  the 
behests  of  their  master.  The  missionaries  stand  on  a  par  with 
the  clergy  at  home — no  higher — no  lower — and  we  cannot  con¬ 
sent  to  have  our  Prudential  Committee  exalted  into  an  Episco¬ 
pate  over  them,  however  benevolent  may  be  their  intentions. 
Pemberton  Square  is  not  the  Zion  from  whence  the  law  was  to 


i 


f 


36 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


proceed.  Let  it  be  so  regarded  and  the  glory  of  our  Board 
departs.  Men  of  manly  self-respect  will  cease  to  enlist  under 
our  charge.  It  was  the  remark  of  Reuben  Tinker  when  asked 
why  he  left  the  service  of  the  Board — “  God  made  me  a  man, 
and  I  felt  that  I  must  be  one.”  That  class,  of  which  he  is  a 
representative,  is  happily  not  extinct  in  our  land. 

A  few  facts  here  deserve  to  be  noticed  : 

1.  The  new  theory  inaugurated  is  directly  contrary  to  all  the 
arguments  and  solicitations  heretofore  presented  by  the  Mis¬ 
sions  in  India  to  the  Mission-House,  and  is  therefore  opposed 
to  all  their  hitherto  declared  experiences.  This  is  a  point  which 
will  not  be  questioned. 

2.  The  new  system  obtained  sanction  from  the  Missions  con¬ 
fessedly  either  by  the  power  of  persuasion  or  of  authority,  and 
therefore,  rests  mainly  upon  the  wisdom  of  those  who  originated 
it  at  home. 

3.  Those  older  missionaries  who  were  to  the  last  most  op¬ 
posed  to  the  new  measures,  were  such  as  have  ever  been  most 
distinguished  for  their  zeal  in  preaching  and  visiting  among  the 
people,  and  have  been  the  most  successful  in  wanning  souls. 

4.  The  new  system  has  operated  largely  to  alienate  and  drive 
off  to  other  missions,  many  of  our  most  intelligent  catechists 
and  converts,  and  has  thus  bereft  our  missionaries  of  a  large 
portion  of  their  strength. 

5.  No  evidences  of  superior  actual  success  from  the  new  mea¬ 
sures  proposed,  have  been  as  yet  adduced  by  the  Deputation  in 
support  of  their  proceedings.  With  them  it  has  been  solely 
theory  versus  experience. 

6.  There  is  not  a  single  returned  missionary  from  Ceylon  in 
this  country — and  there  are  nine  of  them — that  does  not  deplore 
the  changes  we  have  criticised  as  hurtful  to  the  mission  cause. 

Enough  has  been  said  to  show  the  ex  parte  character  of  the 
Report.  If  wre  mistake  not  it  has  been  shown,  that  the  Depu¬ 
tation  went  out  charged  with  a  theory  which  it  w’as  their  deter¬ 
mination  to  carry  out  as  far  as  practicable  in  all  the  Missions. 
It  has  been  shown  that  their  investigations  wrent  to  provide  sup¬ 
port  for  this  theory ;  that  many  of  the  facts  they  have  gather¬ 
ed  are  erroneously  interpreted;  that  some  of  the  testimony 
they  have  adduced  in  their  favor  is  fallacious ;  that  the  represen- 


The  Deputation  to  India. 


37 


tations  of  failure  in  the  Mission  demanding  a  new  policy,  are 
strenuously  denied  by  the  missionaries  ;  that  the  changes  were 
carried  out  against  the  counsel  of  the  older  and  part  of  the 
younger  brethren  ;  and,  finally,  that  by  means  of  these  changes 
the  powers  of  control  at  the  Mission-House  have  been  greatly 
increased.  That  advantages  have  been  gained  by  the  visit  of 
the  Deputation,  we  will  not  pretend  to  deny.  They  have  un¬ 
doubtedly  helped  forward  some  portions  of  the  mission  enter¬ 
prise  in  the  right  direction.  All  they  have  done  to  promote 
village  church  organizations,  we  are  disposed  to  approve.  The 
question  is,  whether  seeing  that  the  Missions  were  already  aim¬ 
ing  at  and  steadily  making  for  this  same  result,  the  assistance 
they  have  rendered  in  this  way  will  compensate  for  the  expense 
they  have  incurred,  and  will  counterbalance  the  evil  they  have 
done.  Our  deliberate  conviction  is,  that  Deputations  have  no 
more  claim  to  be  trusted  in  the  matter  of  their  judgment,  or  of 
their  missionary  zeal,  than  the  missionaries  themselves,  and 
nothing  but  a  clear  case  of  superiority  in  mental  or  moral  quali¬ 
fications  or  a  manifest  necessity  of  some  sort  can  justify  the 
one  in  undertaking  to  give  directions  to  the  other.  Certainly 
a  measure  so  delicate  and  difficult  of  right  execution  ought  at 
the  beginning,  to  have  received  the  full  sanction  of  the  Board. 
In  not  securing  this  sanction,  we  cannot  but  feel  that  the  Pru¬ 
dential  Committee  have  greatly  erred.  Herein  they  have  been 
guilty  of  a  gross  assumption  of  power,  which  it  is  to  be  hoped 
will  be  thoroughly  guarded  against  in  the  future.  An  apology 
may  be  found  for  it  in  the  fact,  that  hitherto  they  have  enjoyed 
an  almost  unlimited  sway,  and  have  had  their  proceedings  sub¬ 
ject  to  no  review  and  control,  being  most  implicitly  trusted  and 
habitually  lauded.  And  lest  the  woe  actually  come  of  which  we 
have  been  so  often  reminded,  the  woe  that  follows  when  all  men 
speak  well  of  us,  it  may  be  well  that  the  Board,  taking  warn¬ 
ing,  in  season,  should  prevent  so  disastrous  a  result  by  improv¬ 
ing  at  least  a  portion  of  its  annual  meetings  to  the  strict  ex¬ 
amination  of  its  administrative  affairs,  and  devote  less  time 
to  a  general  glorification.  No  well-managed  body  will  ever 
allow  such  instructions  as  those  detailed  in  the  Report,  to  pro¬ 
ceed  from  any  of  its  officers  annually  elected,  without  being  in¬ 
formed  thereof,  before  the  end  of  the  third  year,  as  would  have 


38  The  Deputation  to  India. 

been  the  case  now,  had  not  the  special  meeting  at  Albany  been 
called. 

We  shall  conclude  this  already  too  long  Article,  by  quoting 
the  following  extract  from  a  private  letter  which  it  has  been  our 
privilege  to  peruse,  coming  from  a  distinguished  and  judicious 
missionary,  in  altogether  another  field,  and  sincerely  friendly 
to  the  Deputation.  It  carries  so  much  sound  sense,  and  evinces 
so  excellent  a  spirit,  that  we  know  we  shall  be  pardoned  for 
making  use  of  it  without  his  sanction  or  name : 

On  reflection  I  do  not  know  why  I  was  so  much  surprised  at  the  de¬ 
bate  regarding  the  doings  of  the  Deputation  to  India.  I  think  the  Com¬ 
mittee  fell  into  a  mistake  in  authorizing  the  inauguration  (that  is  the  word 
now,  I  believe,)  of  great  changes  in  the  mode  of  conducting  Missions, 
without  consulting  the  Board.  This  I  think  the  Committee  should  at  once 
frankly  acknowledge.  Nor  will  it  hurt  their  reputation  to  make  such  an 
acknowledgment.  No  reasonable  man  will  demand  perfection  in  any 
body  of  missionary  directors,  “  To  err  is  human.”  Then  again,  I  think 
it  is  equally  human  to  swing  over  to  extremes.  That  for  many  years  the 
extreme  of  missionary  tactics  was  in  favor  of  gradual  literary  enlighten¬ 
ment  by  the  press  and  by  schools,  rather  than  of  efforts  for  immediate 
conversion  through  the  preaching  of  the  word,  I  have  never  had  any 
doubt..  But  now  again,  there  is  so  strong  a  re-action,  that  there  is  almost 
a  dead  certainty  that  the  press  and  education  will  be  put  too  far  in  the 
back-ground.  We  cannot  dispense  with  either  one  or  the  other,  nor 
should  the  standard  of  education  be  depressed  too  low.  And  above  all 
things,  any  tendency  to  get  up  a  patent-right  machinery  for  making  Chris¬ 
tians  which  all  must  work  just  so  in  all  places,  without  reference  to  cir¬ 
cumstances  ;  this,  every  missionary  and  every  friend  of  Missions  should 
sternly  resist.  The  missionary  in  the  main,  must  be  the  best  judge  of  the 
field  he  is  cultivating,  and  of  the  changes  which  the  actual  progress  of 
his  work  requires  to  be  made  from  time  to  time,  and  he  must  be  in  a  great 
degree  free  in  his  action.  Without  endorsing  in  any  way  the  course  of 
Mr.  P.,  I  know  that  there  can  be  the  “  experience  of  a,  pressure”  too  strong 
for  the  free  expression  of  individual  opinion.  And  this  will  always  react 
unhappily  Avhen  the  pressure  departs. 

These  suggestions  clearly  indicate  the  nature  of  the  evil  to  be 
removed  and  the  remedy  to  be  applied.  What  we  plead  for  is 
that  the  missionaries  be  allowed,  and  have  secured  to  them,  a 
larger  liberty  in  the  prosecution  of  their  work,  the  liberty  they 
were  wont  to  enjoy  in  the  times  of  Evarts  and  Wisner. 


APPENDIX. 


M 


The  following  Articles,  ably  discussing  two  important  branches  of  the 
general  subject  considered  in  the  foregoing  Review,  are  taken  from  the 
editorial  columns  of  the  “  New  York  Evangelist,”  and  recommended  to 
readers  for  their  attentive  perusal. 


THE  AMERICAN  BOARD. 

The  Ecclesiastical  Question. 

Among  the  subjects  referred  to  the  Committee  of  thirteen  by  the  Ame¬ 
rican  Board  at  its  late  meeting  in  Albany,  is  an  alleged  “  total  change  in 
the  ecclesiastical  constitution  of  the  mission”  in  Ceylon.  This  point, 
stated  as  above  in  the  Report  of  the  Committee  on  that  mission,  which 
was  the  occasion  of  the  special  meeting,  did  not  come  up  for  discussion 
during  the  sessions  of  that  meeting,  except  incidentally.  But  it  is  doubt¬ 
less  one  concerning  which  much  dissatisfaction  and  anxiety  is  felt;  espe¬ 
cially  in  the  Presbyterian  section  of  the  patrons  and  members  of  the 
Board.  • 

It  is  not  with  a  desire  to  aggravate  the  discontent,  which  we  hope  may 
be  entirely  removed  in  the  expected  adjustment  of  the  affairs  at  issue,  but 
to  assist  in  directing  attention  to  the  points  requiring  special  considera¬ 
tion,  that  we  offer  a  few  remarks  upon  the  subject  at  the  present  time. 
Most  deeply  do  we  feel  that  the  only  true  way  to  secure  harmony  and 
confidence  in  the  affairs  of  this  institution,  especially  at  the  present  junc¬ 
ture,  is  to  encourage  the  freest  discussion  of  all  points  concerning  which 
dissatisfaction  has  arisen.  This  course  we  shall  deem  it  our  duty  to  pur¬ 
sue,  not,  we  trust,  in  a  captious  spirit,  but  with  a  sincere  desire  to  secure 
the  best  interests  of  a  most  sacred  cause. 

In  the  American  Board  of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Missions,  it  will 
be  borne  in  mind,  three  distinct  denominations  of  professed  Christians  are 
united.  They  have  their  distinct  ecclesiastical  organizations,  their  distinct 
organic  interests,  and  their  distinct  peculiarities  of  ecclesiastical  polity. 
But  they  have  been  disposed  to  unite  rather  than  pursue  three  sepa¬ 
rate  and  independent  courses  of  action,  because  they  have  looked  upon 
each  other  as  sister  denominations,  engaged  in  the  propagation  of  the 
same  faith,  and  founded  upon  the  same  general  principles  of  ecclesiasti¬ 
cal  organization  and  government. 

In  the  administration  of  the  affairs  of  such  a  Board,  it  is  fair  to  expect 
two  things  :  first,  that  the  principles  held  in  common  by  the  three  deno¬ 
minations  will  never,  without  the  most  obvious  reasons  and  the  fullest  un¬ 
derstanding,  be  departed  from  ;  and,  second,  that  in  regard  to  the  princi- 
ciples  on  which  they  differ — how  far  those  held  by  one  party  shall  be 


40 


Appendix. 


allowed  to  predominate,  and  how  far  those  of  another — the  utmost  Chris¬ 
tian  impartiality  will  be  exercised.  Such,  we  believe,  has  ever  been  the 
understanding  of  all  parties.  And  it  marks  the  fraternal  confidence  which 
the  denominations  thus  united  entertain  for  each  other,  that  at  this  mo¬ 
ment  all  the  members  of  the  Prudential  Committee,  and  all  the  Secretaries 
with  two  exceptions  are  from  a  single  denomination.  May  the  day  be 
far  distant  when  the  necessity  shall  be  felt  for  any  nice  balancing  of  forces 
in  this  particular. 

In  this  discussion  we  shall  assume  the  two  positions  just  stated  as  fun¬ 
damental  rules,  and  bring  the  action  of  the  Deputation,  so  far  as  it  relates 
to  questions  of  ecclesiastical  polity,  to  that  test. 

If  we  have  not  mistaken  the  facts,  there  are  certain  broad  general  prin¬ 
ciples  on  this  point,  held  in  common  by  all  the  three  denominations,  held 
as  Scriptural — as  indispensable  to  the  right  constitution  of  a  church.  For 
example,  they  are  all  agreed  as  to  the  elements  of  which  a  church  must 
be  composed ;  as  to  a  distinction,  broadly  marked,  between  things  eccle¬ 
siastical  and  things  secular  ;  and  as  to  a  distribution  of  rights  and  duties 
between  the  brotherhood  at  large  and  special  officers  or  representatives  of 
the  Church.  They  are  agreed  in  the  positions  that  ministers  are  but  the 
servants  or  officers  of  the  Church  under  its  Divine  Head ;  that  all  minis¬ 
terial  authority  is  conveyed  through  the  Church  ;  that  there  is  an  essen¬ 
tial  parity  among  all  ministers  duly  ordained  ;  that  neither  ministers  nor 
lay  officers  can  exercise  any  authority  over  the  Church  except  as  officers 
or  representatives  of  the  same,  and  that  all  officers,  whether  ordained  or 
unordained,  as  well  as  private  members,  are  subject  to  the  discipline  of 
the  Church  in  its  organic  capacity,  and  entitled  to  its  protection.  They 
differ,  among  other  things,  as  to  the  classes  of  officers  to  be  appointed 
over  the  Church, — whether  there  should  be  ruling  elders  or  only  pastors 
and  deacons  ;  as  to  the  degree  and  mode  of  organization  between  indivi¬ 
dual  congregations  and  ministers  ;  and  as  to  the  methods  in  which  the 
voice  of  the  Church  ought  to  express  itself. 

Now,  in  all  candor,  we  are  compelled  to  say,  the  recent  action  of  the 
Deputation  does  not  in  our  estimation  stand  the  test  of  the  above  stated 
rules.  It  is,  if  we  understand  it,  the  inauguration  of  a  peculiar  system  of 
ecclesiastical  polity,  long  purposed,  and  for  which  the  way  has  long  been 
preparing,  but  at  variance  in  many  particulars  with  the  fundamental 
principles  of  all  three  of  our  denominations  ;  and  in  respect  to  which  nei¬ 
ther  the  denominations  nor  the  Board  have  been  properly  consulted. 

In  the  report  of  the  Deputation  presented  at  Albany,  on  pages  54  and 
55  we  find  in  a  memorandum  of  the  Senior  Secretary,  the  substance,  as 
we  are  told,  of  the  “  suggestions”  made  by  the  Deputation  to  the  missions 
previous  to  the  discussions  held  under  their  auspices.  These  suggestions 
embody  the  principal  grounds  on  which  the  new  system  is  to  be  sup¬ 
ported. 

We  would  call  attention  in  the  first  place  to  the  position  which  this 
system  assigns  to  the  missionary,  and  the  authority  with  which  he  is 
clothed  by  it.  There  is  a  fallacy,  if  we  are  not  mistaken,  couched  under 
the  apparent  truisms  of  the  first  section  of  the  suggestions.  “  A  mission¬ 
ary,”  it  is  said,  “  is  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  sent  to  heathen  or  unevange¬ 
lized  people,  under  the  command  of  Christ,  to  preach  the  gospel.  lie 
does  not  derive  his  authority  from  the  Board,  nor  from  the  ordaining  body, 
nor  from  any  earthly  source.  The  ordaining  body  merely  recognize  it. 
They  attend  to  the  proofs  of  the  divine  call,  and  pronounce  a  judgment 
upon  it.”  If  this  means  simply  that  what  is  true  of  all  ministers,  is  true 
also  of  missionaries,  as  ministers,  that  they  derive  and  hold  their  commis¬ 
sion  from  God,  and  not  from  men,  we  have  no  objection  to  make.  But 


Appendix.  41 

it  will  then  afford  no  ground  for  placing  the  missionary  in  any  different 
relations  to  the  Church  from  those  of  other  ministers.  If  other  ministers 
cannot  exercise  their  functions  in  an  orderly  manner  apart  from  their 
commission  received  through  the  Church,  and  under  a  responsibility  to 
it,  neither  can  he.  In  the  Presbyterian  Church  a  minister  is  connected 
with  the  Church  through  his  Presbytery,  and  he  is  responsible  to  them 
and  holds  their  commission,  or  he  is  no  minister.  In  the  Congregational 
Church,  he  has  been  ordained  by  a  Council  of  Churches,  and  is  responsi¬ 
ble  more  or  less  directly  to  the  body  of  churches  of  which  that  Council  is 
the  representative,  or  he  is  no  minister.  In  both  cases  the  authority 
emanates  from  the  Church,  and  through  the  Church  from  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  who  is  the  Church’s  head.  So,  too,  the  missionary,  as  such,  is  the 
Church’s  missionary,  sent  forth  to  do  her  work.  Providentially,  he  may 
be  said  to  be  called  of  God  to  be  a  missionary,  just  as  the  Secretary  is 
is  called  of  God  to  be  a  Secretary.  But  as  to  official  authority,  he  is  no 
more  independent  of  his  employers  than  is  the  Secretary  himself.  He 
holds  no  office,  ministerial  or  otherwise,  more  directly  from  Christ  or  more 
independently  of  the  Church  and  her  regulations,  than  does  the  clerical 
editor  of  a  religious  journal. 

But  let  us  look  at  the  next  step  taken  by  the  suggestions.  “  The  mis¬ 
sionary’s  work  and  office  are  in  some  respects  extraordinary.  lie  is  not  a 
pastor  of  a  church  but  the  founder  of  churches,  and  may  have  the  care 
and  superintendence  of  many  churches.  He  is  a  minister  of  the  gospel, 
and  he  is  something  more.  What  he  is,  is  best  indicated  by  the  word 
missionary,  which  is  an  extraordinary  office  for  an  extraordinary  work.” 
The  italics  are  those  of  the  Deputation.  In  another  place  they  say:  “The 
missionary  vocation  includes  the  ministerial  and  is  something  more.  It 
includes  all  the  powers  needful  to  teach  and  disciple  all  nations  which  it 
derives  from  the  Lord  Jesus.”  We  do  not  deny  that  the  work  of  a  mis¬ 
sionary  is  in  some  respects  extraordinary.  So  is  every  individual  minis¬ 
ter’s.  It  is  a  particular  direction  given  to  the  proper  functions  of  a  Chris¬ 
tian  minister.  But  we  do  deny  that  the  work  of  the  missionary  is  in  any 
respect  so  extraordinary,  as  to  require  or  constitute  any  distinct  office  in 
the  Church.  We  deny  that  the  great  Head  of  the  Church  ever  instituted 
or  authorized  us  to  institute  any  such  office.  The  ministry  we  believe  to 
be  an  office  of  divine  appointment.  The  missionary,  if  he  is  an  ordained 
missionary,  is  by  office  a  minister.  He  may  perform  all  the  functions 
proper  to  the  ministerial  office.  But  his  position  as  a  missionary  does  not 
clothe  him  with  any  new  ecclesiastical  powers.  Nor  does  it  authorise 
him  to  exert  its  powers  except  upon  the  broad  basis  of  his  ministerial 
character. 

To  preach  the  gospel  is  one  mode  of  exercising  those  powers ;  to  baptize 
and  administer  the  Lords’  Supper  is  another  ;  to  take  the  pastoral  over¬ 
sight  of  a  particular  congregation  of  believers  is  another;  to  ordain  min¬ 
isters  is  another.  But  they  are  all  included  in  one  and  the  same  office. 
A  home  missionary  or  evangelist  is  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  exercising 
the  powers  conferred  upon  him  by  his  ordination  in  one  particular  set  of 
circumstances,  and  for  the  accomplishment  of  a  particular  work.  And, 
in  the  same  sense,  and  no  other,  is  a  foreign  missionary  a  minister  of  the 
gospel,  exercising  the  powers  of  the  same  office  in  different  circumstances, 
and  for  a  somewhat  different  result.  The  work  of  each  is  but  a  particular 
part  of  what  all  Christian  ministers  may,  when  the  occasion  calls,  under¬ 
take  and  perform.  It  is  the  broad,  comprehensive  office  of  a  Christian 
bishop  or  presbyter  narrowed  down  for  the  time  being  to  a  speciality. 

But  the  Secretary  asserts,  “the  missionary  vocation  includes  the  minis¬ 
terial,  and  is  something  more.”  What  more,  we  ask?  Congregational- 


42 


Appendix. 


ists,  Dutch  Reformed,  and  Presbyterian  churches  all  insist  that  there  is 
no  higher  office  in  the  Church  than  that  of  bishop  or  presbyter, — that  is, 
of  minister  of  the  gospel.  A  minister  may  hold  other  offices,  secular  or 
religious,  provided  they  are  not  incompatible  with  this.  But  then,  their 
functions  are  distinct.  Would  the  Secretary  claim  for  his  own  office,  that 
“  it  includes  the  ministerial,  and  is  something  more?”  Would  he  say  the 
same  of  that  of  a  member  of  the  Prudential  Committee?  We  trust  not. 
We  understand  him  as  asserting  for  the  missionary,  not  merely  the  right 
and  duty  to  exercise  other  offices — financial,  educational, 'editorial,  as  well 
as  the  ministerial — but  that  he  holds  an  office  higher  than  all  these,  and 
inclusive  of  them  all ;  in  virtue  of  which  he  has  peculiar  powers,  and  a 
peculiar  position  in  the  Church.  By  this  peculiar  and  extraordinary 
office,  derived  directly  from  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  responsible  to  no  man, 
except  through  pecuniary  obligations  to  the  American  Board,  he  is  in¬ 
vested  with  authority  which  no  minister  of  the  gospel  in  any  church  in 
Christendom  claims  or  wtou1<3  dare  to  exercise.  He  need  not  belong  to  any 
ecclesiastical  body.  That  which  had  existed  in  Ceylon  from  the  beginning 
was  dissolved  during  the  vifit  of  the  Deputation  as  an  incumbrance.  There 
is  no  propriety  in  his  keeping  up  a  distinction  between  his  secular  and 
ecclesiastical  business.  The  natives  must  not  be  allowed  to  suppose  that 
he  distributes  the  funds  entrusted  to  him,  by  a  commission  less  divine 
than  he  preaches  the  gospel.  In  his  sole  right  as  missionary,  he  has  the 
authority  to  gather  churches;  to  ordain  ministers;  to  exercise  ecclesiasti¬ 
cal  control  over  churches  so  formed  and  ministers  so  ordained ;  to  discipline 
both  when  he  deems  them  worthy  of  it,  and,  by  his  simple  decree,  cut 
them  off  from  the  body  of  Christ  by  excommunication. 

If  any  doubt  the  truth  of  this  representation,  let  us  call  their  attention 
to  an  extract  from  a  report  elicited  from  one  of  the  missions,  and  expli¬ 
citly  sanctioned  by  the  Deputation  in  the  name  of  the  Prudential  Com¬ 
mittee.  It  will  be  found  in  the  proceedings  of  the  Madura  mission,  as 
printed  for  the  use  of  that  Committee  :  we  hope  ere  long  it  will  be  printed 
also,  with  the  other  important  documents  bearing  on  the  questions  now  at 
issue,  for  the  use  of  the  Board.  The  Report  asserts  as  follows:  “But  the 
mission  has  over  these  churches  and  pastors,  not  only  a  pecuniary  but  an 
ecclesiastical  and  moral  control.  It  has  ecclesiastical  control  in  that  it 
should,  being  composed  of  evangelists  sent  forth  for  the  purpose,  organize 
the  churches  and  ordain  the  pastors  ;  and  as  it  can  organize  and  ordain, 
so  it  can,  if  necessity  require,  separate  the  sound  part  of  a  church  from  a 
corrupt  part,  and  depose  from  the  pastoral  office  an  unworthy  Demas,  Hy- 
meneus,  or  Philetus.”  To  this  the  Deputation  rejoin  :  “  Missionaries  are 
properly  evangelists,  such  as  Timothy  and  Titus  were,  and  their  relations 
to  native  pastors  are  well  described  in  your  report.”  “  The  command  to 
publish  the  gospel  of  course  involves  and  gives  the  necessary  powers  for 
doing  the  thing  commanded,  for  executing  the  commission.  When  native 
churches  are  to  be  organized,  and  native  pastors  ordained,  who  is  authori¬ 
zed  to  perform  those  services  if  the  missionary  and  bodies  of  missionaries 
are  not  ?”  “  The  powers  of  the  mission  to  interpose  authoritatively  in  case 
of  unsoundness  in  the  native  churches  and  pastors,  are  stated  in  your 
report.  No  improvement  can  be  made  on  the  simplicity  and  the  efficacy 
of  the  New  Testament  plan  for  propagating  the  gospel  among  the  hea¬ 
then.”  Turn  next  to  the  printed  proceedings  of  the  mission  at  Ceylon. 
In  response  to  the  missionaries  there,  after  the  act  above  referred  to,  the 
Deputation  say  as  follows  :  “  The  dissolving  of  your  ecclesiastical  body 
by  a  unanimous  vote,  freed  you  from  an  inconvenient  and  needless  per¬ 
plexity.  Your  mission  as  such  has  all  the  power  to  organize  churches 
and  ordain  pastors,  which  any  other  body  can  ever  derive  from  God’s 


Appendix.  43 

word  ;  and  the  proper  distinction  between  the  duties  of  the  mission  and 
those  of  the  other  body,  composed  of  the  same  persons  and  operating  on 
the  same  ground,  can  never  be  so  drawn  as  to  make  the  working  of  the 
two  bodies  otherwise  than  extremely  inconvenient.  The  mission  can 
more  easily  do  the  whole  work  than  a  part ;  and  you  certainly  did  well 
in  simplifying  your  machinery.  If  missionaries  distinguish  between  their 
own  ministerial  and  missionary  functions,  then  the  natives  will  do  the 
same  for  them.  The  missionary  vocation  includes  the  ministerial,  and  is 
something  more.'  It  includes  all  the  powers  needful  to  teach  and  disciple 
all  nations,  which  it  derives  from  the  Lord  -Jesus  ”  Abundance  of  matter 
to  the  same  effect  may  be  found  all  over  the  documents. 

Now  let  us  look  at  the  position  assigned  by  the  same  system  to  the  na¬ 
tive  pastors  and  churches.  It  is  a  prominent,  and  we  are  happy  to  say, 
a  most  excellent  feature  of  the  plan  of  the  Deputation  to  organize  native 
churches  and  ordain  native  pastors  over  them  as  fast  as  practicable,  and 
to  throw  upon  them  as  much  of  the  responsibility  of  managing  their  own 
affairs  as  expediency  will  permit.  But  how  are  these  churches  to  be  or¬ 
ganized,  and  what  relations  are  they  and  their  pastors  to  sustain  to  each 
other  and  the  missionaries  ? 

In  the  first  place,  these  churches  are  all  to  be  organized  internally  on 
the  Congregational  plan.  To  this  we  have  no  objection  to  make,  except 
its  exclusive  feature.  We  do  not  believe  it  right  for  the  Deputation  to 
prescribe  Congregationalism  to  the  native  churches  as  the  New  Testament 
plan,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  views  held  by  other  denominations  in  the 
Board.  This  they  do  in  effect,  when  they  use  such  language  as  the  fol¬ 
lowing.  We  quote  from  their  reply  to  a  report  from  the  Madura  Mission; 
“  Mission  churches  obviously  require  the  utmost  simplicity  of  structure, 
and  all  that  is  good  for  them,  may  be  learned  from  the  New  Testament. 
A  local  church  is  God1  s  institution.  So  is  the  pastoral  office.  So  are  dea¬ 
cons  to  do  work  from  ichich  pastors  should  be  relieved.  And  a  church 
thus  organized  on  heathen  ground,  in  the  New  Testament  simplicity  of 
structure,  is,  as  all  the  New  Testament  churches  were,  a  Missionary 
church,”  &c. 

As  to  the  relations  of  native  churches  and  pastors  to  each  other,  they 
are  to  be  formed  on  the  basis  of  the  most  unqualified  independency.  We 
look  in  vain  for  either  the  Classis  of  the  Dutch  Reformed  Church,  the 
Presbytery  of  the  Presbyterian,  the  Consociation  of  Connecticut  and  Rhode 
Island,  the  Conference  of  Maine,  or  the  Council  which  is  the  bond  of  ec¬ 
clesiastical  fellowship,  supervision  and  responsibility  in  all  the  Congre¬ 
gational  churches  of  New  England.  Whether  any  such  bodies  are  to  be 
formed  is  a  question  of  remote  contingencies.  So  long  as  the  Board  con¬ 
tinues  its  relation  to  them,  we  understand  there  are  to  be  none.  Two 
churches  standing  side  by  side  have  no  ecclesiastical  connection  with  each 
other.  The  pastor  of  the  one  cannot  even  take  part  in  the  ordination  of 
the  pastor  of  another,  except  as  he  may  with  propriety  be  invited  to  do 
so  under  the  authority  of  the  mission,  or  a  committee  of  the  mission,  just 
as  the  Deputation  were  invited,  when  they  happened  to  be  present  at  an 
ordination. 

But  let  us  look  at  their  external  relations.  It  is  assumed  as  a  fixed 
principle  of  missionary  policy  that  no  organic  connection  is  to  be  estab¬ 
lished  between  native  churches  and  any  of  the  ecclesiastical  bodies  in  this 
country.  Nor  are  they  to  be  connected  with  the  missionaries  in  any  eccle¬ 
siastical  bodies,  similar  to  those  in  this  country.  In  such  bodies, 
the  native  pastors  could  claim  the  right  to  an  equal  vote,  and  that  would 
be  dangerous.  “  Associated  with  the  missionaries  in  ecclesiastical  bodies, 
on  a  parity  as  to  voice  and  right,  which  after  all  cannot  exist  in  effect,” 


44 


Appendix. 


say  the  Deputation,  “the  native  ministry  will  be  in  danger  of  becoming 
ambitious,  envious,  jealous,  and  addicted  to  cliques  and  cabals  for  carry¬ 
ing  their  points  against  missionaries  and  the  mission.”  So  there  must  be 
literally  no  ecclesiastical  bodies  in  whose  deliberations  and  decisions  they 
can  have  a  voice. 

But  are  they  practically  independent  ?  No,  by  no  means  ;  at  least  not 
so  long  as  we  have  any  concern  with  them.  The  missionary  is  there  ;  and 
he,  either  singly  or  with  others,  where  there  is  an  organized  mission,  has 
authority,  in  virtue  of  his  plenipotentiary  office,  derived  from  Christ  and 
not  from  the  Church,  to  interfere  in  all  their  concerns.  He  can  enter 
their  communion  to  decide  who  are  true  and  sound,  and  who  are  unsound 
members  of  the  Church  ;  he  can  excommunicate  those  whom  he  judges 
unsound  ;  he  can  depose  their  pastor  from  his  office,  he  can  cast  the 
church  itself  out  from  the  communion  of  churches.  In  virtue  of  his  one 
great  office  involving  all  secular  as  well  as  what  we  have  been  wont  to 
distinguish  as  ecclesiastical  affairs,  he  can  by  one  act  stop  their  pecuniary 
supplies  and  cast  them  down  from  their  position  as  churches.  The  mis¬ 
sionary  located  at  the  station  may  be  a  single  young  man,  just  graduated 
from  the  theological  seminary,  and  no  other  missionary  may  be  found 
within  a  distance  of  forty  miles  ;  and  the  native  pastor,  if  the  mission  be 
one  of  the  older  ones — that  of  Ceylon  for  example — may  be  a  man  of  years, 
of  learning,  of  thorough  training  in  the  Scriptures,  of  ripe  experience  as 
a  catechist,  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  native  character.  And  yet 
the  young  man  is  practically  the  pastor’s  bishop.  A  more  complete  sys¬ 
tem  of  subjection  to  an  authority  wholly  out  of  themselves,  could  hardly 
be  devised.  It  may  be  exercised  wisely  and  generously.  We  have  great 
confidence  in  most  of  our  missionaries.  But  it  may  be  exercised  ill  too. 

Let  i^s  look  now  at  the  responsibilities  of  the  missionary.  Who  is  to 
call  him  to  account  if  he  proves  himself  unworthy  of  his  high  functions  ? 
According  to  all  the  principles  recognized  in  our  ecclesiastical  platforms, 
no  man  living  has  the  authority  to  do  it.  He  has  no  connection  with  ec¬ 
clesiastical  bodies  in  this  country.  It  is  a  part  of  the  plan  that  he  shall 
be  united  with  his  brethren  in  no  such  bodies  on  missionary  ground. 
There  may  or  may  not  be  a  missionary  church  at  the  station  ;  and  if  there 
be,  he  may  be  connected  with  it  as  pastor  or  as  one  of  the  brotherhood.  But 
it  is  a  single  church,  and  in  no  capacity  for  exercising  discipline  over  a 
gospel  minister.  Who  shall  call  him  to  account,  who  shall  judge  him, 
admonish  him  or  subject  him  to  Christian  discipline  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus?  If  he  is  slandered  or  the  subject  of  untrue  suspicions,  who 
shall  vindicate  him  and  hold  him  up,  in  the  same  holy  name  ? 

There  is  a  body  who  according  to  the  views  of  the  Deputation,  may 
claim  to  act  in  such  exigencies.  It  is  the  mission.  Ih  speaking  of  the 
inherent  powers  of  the  missionary,  we  have  hitherto  regarded  him  chiefly 
as  standing  alone.  But  in  point  of  fact  it  is  not  expected  that  he  will  ordi¬ 
narily  stand  alone.  Where  there  are  more  missionaries  than  one  in  the  same 
field,  it  is  expected  they  will  unite  themselves  into  a  single  body.  The 
mission  and  not  the  missionary  will  then  be  the  controlling  authority. 
Whatever  the  individual  missionary  may  do,  ecclesiastically  or  otherwise, 
that  the  mission  may  do  by  the  votes  of  its  majority.  And  of  what  mate¬ 
rials  is  the  mission  composed  ?  Not  of  pastors  of  churches.  Not  of  el¬ 
ders  and  delegates  of  churches  ;  butof  an  aggregate  of  ministers  and  lay¬ 
men — physicians,  printers,  teachers,  of  different  grades,  brought  together 
and  made  members  of  the  body  with  an  equal  vote,  by  no  other  authority 
whatever  than  an  appointment  from  the  Prudential  Committee.  With 
this  body,  so  constituted,  is  lodged  plenipotentiary  power,  both  ecclesias¬ 
tical  and  pecuniary,  over  missionaries,  mission  churches  and  native  pas- 


Appendix. 


45 


tors.  This  body  we  presume  would  be  thought  competent  to  discipline 
the  missionary.  And  this  is  what  is  called,  in  the  language  of  the  Depu¬ 
tation,  “simplifying  the  machinery.”  This,  it  is  assumed,  over  and  over, 
is,  “  the  simple  New  Testament  plan”  for  conducting  missions. 

But  now  there  is  another  question:  Has  the  mission,  with  all  its  high 
powers,  no  superior  to  whom  it  must  hold  itself  amenable?  Yes,  it  has. 
And  here  we  reach  the  summit,  where  all  this  simplifying  of  powers 
gathers  itself  up  to  a  single  point.  It  is  the  Prudential  Committee.  It  is 
not  assumed  that  their  power  is  ecclesiastical ;  though  why  it  should  not 
be,  on  the  principles  of  the  scheme,  we  are  at  a  loss  to  see.  But  as,  in 
virtue  of  their  appointment,  the  missionary  became  such  as  he  is,  so  in 
virtue  of  their  recall  or  stoppage  of  supplies,  he  must  descend  from  his 
high  position  and  return  to  that  of  simple  minister  or  layman.  And  the 
mission,  considered  as  an  organized  body,  must,  at  the  word  of  the  same 
authority,  absolutely  cease  to  exist. 

We  think  the  Prudential  Committee,  unconsciously  wo  presume,  are  in 
th e  exercise  of  functions  eminently  ecclesiastical.  To  them,  with  and 
through  the  Deputation  acting  in  their  name,  and  clothed  with  their  au¬ 
thority,  belongs  the  responsible  authorship  of  the  entire  scheme  which  we 
have  been  describing.  They  have  found  themselves — this  little  band  of 
seven  laymen,  and  two  ministers  of  the  gospel,  in  the  city  of  Boston,  (sit¬ 
ting  side  by  side,  as  it  were,  with  such  venerable  bodies  as  the  Synods 
that  composed  the  Cambridge  and  Saybrook  platforms,  or  the  Assembly 
of  Divines  at  Westminster,)  charged  with  the  duty  of  devising  a  new 
scheme  of  Church  organization,  which  they  may  recommend  as  the  only 
true  New  Testament  plan  for  a  class  of  infant  churches,  to  be  formed  in 
circumstances  and  of  materials  the  most  various,  and  destined  as  they  hope, 
to  encompass  the  entire  unevangelized  world.  No  man,  we  think,  can 
doubt  that  the  exercise  of  such  powers  by  a  body  constituted  as  this  is,  is 
a  novelty  in  ecclesiastical  history.  And  so  is  the  scheme  itself,  devised 
and  recommended  by  them,  and  by  the  Deputation  acting  under  their 
commission.  As  a  whole,  certainly,  this  Missionary  platform  is  a  perfect 
novelty,  totally  unknown  to  any  of  the  denominations  associated  in  this 
Missionary  Board. 

It  will  be  claimed  we  know  by  the  Deputation,  that  this  feature  of  it  is 
an  excellence.  It  shows  it  to  be  unsectarian.  “It  is  strictly  missionary” 
they  say  “  and  not  at  all  sectarian.  None  of  the  denominations  can  claim 
exclusive  affinity  to  the  simple  organization  they  have  adopted.  No  other 
characteristic  is  appropriate  for  it,  than  the  apostolical  or  the  missionary.” 
We  doubt,  of  course,  its  apostolical  character.  But  as  to  its  being  unsec¬ 
tarian,  we,  for  our  part,  can  assure  the  Deputation,  it  is  no  comfort  to  us, 
when  we  are  made  to  assist  in  propagating  a  system  from  which  every 
distinguishing  feature  of  Presbyterianism  seems  studiously  excluded  ;  to 
be  told  that  it  violates  equally  some  of  the  best  principles  of  our  Congre¬ 
gational  brethren.  There  are  features  of  the  Congregational  system  which 
we  like  much.  Many  of  us  were  brought  up  Congregationalists  ourselves  ; 
and  though  we  prefer  the  Presbyterian  system  as  the  most  reliable,  there 
is  no  other  we  would  choose  in  preference  to  that,  if  we  must  give  up  our 
own.  Scarcely  a  man  of  us,  we  presume,  would  hesitate  to  say:  “If  I 
were  not  a  Presbyterian,  I  would  be  a  Congregationalist.”  Could  it  then 
be  a  relief  to  us,  to  be  assured  that  the  most  conservative  and  liberal  fea¬ 
tures  of  Congregationalism,  as  it  was  when  we  first  learned  to  love  it,  the 
points,  on  which  that  system  most  resembles  our  own  ;  its  parity  in  the 
ministry  ;  its  reservation  of  ecclesiastical  authority  exclusively  for  eccle¬ 
siastical  bodies  ;  its  inseparable  connection  of  the  right  of  representation 
with  the  duty  of  submission  to  authority  ;  its  system  of  “  fellowship”  by 


46  Appendix. 

which  individual  churches  become  responsible  members  of  an  organic 
whole,  are  Avholly  discarded  ?  We  think  the  Deputation  have  entirely 
mistaken  the  nature  of  what  is  unsectarian.  Nor  have  they  a  juster  view 
of  the  grounds  on  which  these  three  sister  denominations  came  together 
in  the  American  Board.  It  was  by  no  means  on  the  ground  of  mutually 
excluding,  but  of  mutually  respecting,  and  by  all  fair  and  fraternal  adjust¬ 
ments,  avoiding  to  interfere  with  each  others  peculiarities.  For  ourselves, 
much  as  we  love  our  own  Presbyterianism — sectarian  as  perhaps  the  De¬ 
putation  would  think  us;  much  rather  would  we  give  over  the  whole 
ground  to  genuine  Congregationalism,  than  take  our  share,  though  it  were 
much  greater  than  it  is,  of  this  incongruous  mixture  of  some  of  the  worst 
elements  of  the  Episcopacy,  with  that  rank  Brownism  which  the  Old  Fa¬ 
thers  of  New  England  repudiated.  If  this  be  the  alternative  for  our  infant 
missionary  churches,  we  would  say  unhesitatingly,  with  reference  to  either 
of  our  sister  denominations  associated  with  us,  “  Give  her  the  living  child, 
and  in  no  wise  slay  it.” 

But  we  must  here  say  a  few  words  with  reference  to  our  second  rule 
laid  down  at  the  beginning.  In  regard  to  points  on  which  our  three  de¬ 
nominations  differ,  we  are  not  quite  satisfied  that  there  has  been  as  much 
impartiality  manifested  in  the  conduct  of  our  missions,  as  might  have 
been  expected.  The  Deputation  claim,  indeed,  that  the  ecclesiastical  sys¬ 
tem  they  have  adopted,  “is  the  primary  form  of  the  three  grand  ecclesi¬ 
astical  orders  of  Protestant  Christendom ;  Congregational,  Presbyterian, 
and  Episcopalian.”  The  Episcopal  element  we  suppose,  is  that  bench  of 
supervisors  called  the  Mission.  The  Congregational  finds  its  shadow  at 
least,  in  the  internal  constitution  of  individual  churches.  But  we'  look  in 
vain  for  a  single  feature  of  Presbyterianism,  considered  as  distinct  from 
other  denominations.  The  General  Assembly,  it  is  well  known,  has  had 
a  wish,  in  cases  where  it  may  he  found  practicable,  to  bring  the  Presby¬ 
terian  missionaries,  who  are  either  now,  or  may  hereafter  be  on  heathen 
ground,  into  organic  connection  with  itself,  so  as  through  them  to  try  at 
least  the  experiment  of  establishing  what  it  regards  as  its  own  excellent 
ecclesiastical  system,  on  some  small  portion  of  the  missionary  field.  The 
Dutch  Church  has  such  an  experiment  in  the  Mission  at  Arcot.  The 
Presbyterian  Church  almost  had,  at  one  time,  in  the  Missions  of  Madras 
and  Ceylon.  In  the  latter,  there  was  organized  from  the  beginning,  an 
ecclesiastical  body  called  the  “  Consociation  or  Presbytery  of  Jaffna.” 
About  ten  years  ago  that  body  dropped  its  -congregational  name,  and  be¬ 
came  the  “  Presbytery  of  Jaffna.”  It  would  have  been  an  easy  thing, 
doubtless,  had  that  tendency  been  encouraged,  to  have  strengthened  the 
bonds  of  affection  between  the  Presbyterian  Church  and  the  Board,  by 
allowing  that  mission  to  become  distinctively  a  Presbyterian  Mission.  But 
if  we  are  rightly  informed,  no  sooner  was  the  change  referred  to  reported 
in  this  country,  than  the  missionaries  were  informed  from  head  quarters, 
that  their  action  would  not  be  sustained  in  this  country,  and  they  deemed 
it  prudent  to  recede.  Now,  under  the  influence  of  the  Deputation  during 
their  late  visit,  and  with  the  very  puerile  excuse  that  the  clerk  happened 
to  forget  to  bring  the  minutes,  that  body  is  abolished  ;  and  in  their  address 
to  one  of  the  missions  in  India,  the  Deputation  distinctly  declare,  “it  is  in 
vain  to  expect  the  direct  propagation  of  either  of  the  religious  sects  of 
Christendom  as  such  in  heathen  lands.”  And  again,  “  we  rejoice  in  your 
determination  to  content  yourselves  with  the  broad  missionary  relation 
you  at  present  sustain  to  the  native  churches  and  pastors,  unembarrassed 
by  dependent  relations  to  foreign  ecclesiastical  bodies.”  So  then,  as  far 
as  the  power  of  the  Deputation  goes,  and  as  far  as  the  future  action  of  the 
Board  shall  sustain  the  acts  of  the  Deputation,  this  question  may  be  con- 


Appendix.  47 

sidered  as  set  at  rest.  It  is  in  vain  to  think  of  propagating  Presbyte¬ 
rianism  among  the  heathen,  it  is  in  vain  for  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  however  much  she  may  contribute,  however  nume¬ 
rous  the  missionaries  she  furnishes  from  among  her  sons,  however  liberal 
she  may  show  herself  in  allowing  free  scope  to  the  preferences  of  her  sis¬ 
ter  churches  associated  with  her  in  the  great  enterprise,  ever  to  think  of 
having  so  much  as  a  single  Presbytery  connected  with  her  under  the  pa¬ 
tronage  of  the  American  Board. 

We  have  spoken  freely  in  regard  to  these  matters,  not  from  any  want 
of  attachment  to  the  American  Board,  but  from  just  the  opposite.  We 
respect  the  Prudential  Committee.  We  are  grateful  to  them  for  their 
eminently  faithful  and  laborious  services.  We  do  not  think  they  intend  to 
usurp  power.  The  ability,  the  fidelity,  the  long  experience,  the  eminent 
wisdom  of  the  Senior  Secretary,  we  have  been  accustomed  to  regard  with  a 
respect  bordering  upon  reverence.  But  we  find  them,  with  and  through 
the  concurrence  of  missionaries  obtained  under  their  influence,  inaugu¬ 
rating  a  new  and  novel  system  of  ecclesiastical  organization  and  govern¬ 
ment,  to  be  put  in  operation  as  fast  as  prudence  will  allow,  over  the 
entire  missionary  field.  And  unhappily  we  have  no  confidence  in  it.  We 
know  that  some  of  our  oldest  and  most  experienced  missionaries  have  no 
confidence  in  it.  We  feel,  in  relation  to  the  whole  subject,  a  deep  sad¬ 
ness. 

What  is  to  be  the  condition  of  churches  thus  formed  while  the  mission 
retains  its  relations  to  them  ?  That  of  complete  dependence.  The  mis¬ 
sionaries,  it  is  said,  are  their  fathers — they  the  children ;  and,  for  aught 
we  can  see,  they  must  remain,  while  under  the  mission,  mere  children. 
And  what  will  be  their  condition  when  the  mission  withdraws  ?  They  are 
of  complete  disintegration.  And  can  they  bear  it — these  mere  “  babes, 
children,  youth,  and  not  mea?”  We  say  in  words  borrowed  from  the 
proceedings  of  the  Madura  Mission,  though  with  a  different  inference:  “If 
the  strong  minded,  intelligent,  and  independent  men  of  Europe  and  Ame¬ 
rica  require  a  church  organization,  and  leaders  to  enable  them  to  with¬ 
stand  the  assault  of  spiritual  foes,  and  to  lead  them  onward  in  their  path 
to  heaven,  how  much  more  does  the  fearful,  clinging,  Tamulian  need  it.” 
And  yet  for  this  same  “  fearful,  clinging  Tamulian,”  is  chosen  the  loosest 
possible  organization ;  and,  for  his  village  church,  a  position  of  as  com¬ 
plete  separation  as  could  be  given  to  the  most  isolated  church  in  Chris¬ 
tendom.  What  can  he  be  expected  to  do — an  individual,  native  pastor, 
with  his  little  handful  of  native  villages,  surrounded  by  the  strong  roaring 
lions  of  heathendom,  and  no  Christian  fortress  or  larger  Christian  band 
to  fall  back  upon?  We  have  no  confidence  in  the  stability  and  perma¬ 
nence  of  such  churches.  True,  they  may  form  organizations,  among 
themselves  if  they  choose  ;  but  having  never  been  trained  Avith  reference 
to  this  ;  having  never  seen,  never  been  accustomed  to  take  part  in  a  pro¬ 
perly  ecclesiastical  body — council,  consociation,  classis  or  presbytery,  how 
can  they  be  expected  to  do  it  wisely  ? 

And  what  then  are  to  be  their  relations  to  the  mission  ?  The  local 
church  as  koon  as  possible  will  be  made  to  depend  pecuniarily  upon  itself. 
Then,  according  to  the  plan,  the  mission  will  have  no  longer  any  control 
over  it.  But  church  after  church  may  become  thus  emancipated;  and 
still  the  mission  may  be  operating  not  far  distant  from  them  for  a  gene¬ 
ration  to  come.  Will  no  serious  embarrassment  arise  from  the  action  of 
such  independent  bodies — the  product  of  the  mission,  and  looked  upon  by 
the  heathen  as  its  representatives  and  yet,  perhaps,  becoming  more  or 
less  corrupt — possibly  assuming  to  maintain  caste  or  even  polygamy  as  a 
scriptural  institution,  and  no  body  of  Christians  there  or  elsewhere  having 


48 


Appendix. 


authority  to  call  the  erring  member  to  account.  We  foresee  evils  of  no 
trivial  character  likely  to  arise  out  of  such  complete  independency.  The 
Deputation  will  say  perhaps  :  Do  not  distrust  providence.  They  will  tell 
us  in  their  own  language  to  the  Madura  mission,  that  “adverse  theories 
on  this  subject  before  a  bold  and  confiding  experiment  has  been  made 
under  favorable  circumstances,  are  not  entitled  to  any  weight.”  But  un¬ 
fortunately,  we  lack  the  favorable  judgment  necessary  to  a  confiding  ex¬ 
periment.  And  strongly  persuaded  as  we  are  that  the  system  is  in  many 
features,  against  reason  and  Scripture,  for  us  to  make  the  experiment,  or 
allow  it  to  be  made  in  our  name,  without  remonstrance,  would  be  to  take 
a  course  quite  too  bold  to  be  justifiable. 

We  earnestly  hope  the  Committee  of  thirteen  will  not  pass  over  this 
part  of  their  trust  without  the  most  mature  and  thorough  investigation. 
They  are  among  our  most  trusted  men.  The  confidence  of  many,  at  this 
critical  juncture,  hangs  on  them  to  see  what  results  they  will  reach. 
The  special  prayers  of  the  Church  of  Christ  ought  to  attend  them.  We 
fondly  hope  some  plan  will  be  devised  to  remove  a  class  of  evils  which  we 
know  are  creating  great  uneasiness  in  many  minds,  both  at  home  and 
among  the  missionaries,  and  that  tlm  end  will  be  not  only  the  removal  of 
former  confidence  now  unhappily  impaired,  but  a  large  increase  both  of 
confidence  and  attachment  for  this  noblest,  or  among  the  noblest,  of 
American  institutions. 


THE  AMERICAN  BOARD. 

Governing  Object  in  Missions  to  the  Heathen. 

In  undertaking  any  important  enterprise,  the  first  step  is  to  obtain 
clear  and  definite  views  of  the  object  to  be  aimed  at.  We  approve  hearti¬ 
ly  of  the  endeavor  of  the  Deputation  in  their  late  visit  to  the  Missions  in 
the  East,  to  fix,  both  in  their  own  minds  and  those  of  the  missionaries, 
the  governing  object  to  be  pursued  in  missionary  efforts.  Nor  are  we 
disposed  to  question  the  soundness  of  the  conclusion  at  which  they  arrived, 
taken  as  a  free  and  popular  expression.  The  conversion  of  sinners  is 
unquestionably  one  of  the  chief  objects,  perhaps  the  very  chief,  to  be  pur¬ 
sued,  whether  by  the  missionary  or  the  pastor,  the  minister  of  the  gospel 
or  the  Christian  elder,  deacon  or  church  member.  When  we  consider  it 
by  itself,  and  let  our  minds  be  filled  with  it,  we  can  scarcely  conceive  that 
any  dther  can,  in  any  circumstance,  claim  to  stand  by  its  side.  It  seems 
so  vast,  so  urgent,  that  the  Christian  heart,  without  pausing  to  reflect  for 
a  moment,  feels  constrained  to  rush  forward,  that  it  may  pluck  the 
burning  brand  out  of  the  fire.  And  yet  it  may  happen,  and  we 
believe  sometimes  does,  that  a  too  eager  and  exclusive  regard  for  the 
immediate  conversion  of  one  or  a  few,  may  hinder  the  ultimate  con¬ 
version  and  highest  Christian  sanctification  of  great  numbers.  While, 
therefore,  we  would  agree  heartily  with  the  Deputation  in  making 
this  a  governing  object  of  the  missionary  work,  we  cannot  agree  with 
them  in  giving  it  that  exclusive  and  all  controlling  position  which 
they  are  disposed  to  assign  to  it.  They  make  it,  if  we  have  rightly 
interpreted  them,  with  the  addition  of  two  other  objects  merely  sub¬ 
ordinate,  the  one  grand  end,  with  reference  to  whose  immediate  ac¬ 
complishment  all  our  missionary  plans  and  efforts  are  to  be  shaped. 


I 


Appendix.  49 

And  to  this  position,  thus  exclusively  set  up,  we  arc  constrained  to  demur. 
That  we  have  not  mistaken  their  true  meaning,  we  conclude  both  from 
their  report  rendered  at  Albany,  and  from  the  proceedings  of  the  Missions 
in  which  they  took  part,  especially  of  the  Mission  at  Ceylon.  From  the 
report  of  the  proceedings  of  that  Mission,  which  now  lies  before  us,  we 
learn  that  at  the  opening  of  the  meeting,  “  Mr.  Thompson  read  a  list  of 
subjects,  which  the  Deputation  wished  to  bring  before  the  Mission  for  dis¬ 
cussion,  as  follows:  1.  The  governing  object  of  missions  to  the  heathen. 
Should  it  be  the  conversion  of  sinners,  the  gathering  of  those  converts 
into  churches,  and  the  ordaining  of  native  pastors  over  those  churches  V’ 
This  we  perceive  is  in  the  form  of  a  question,  intended  simply  as  a  basis 
for  discussion.  But  it  is  manifestly  a  leadihg  question,  conveying  in  ad¬ 
vance  the  opinion  which  the  Deputation  themselves  had  already  reached. 
After  discussion,  the  subject  was  referred  to  a  committee,  who  brought  in 
a  report  embodying,  as  we  are  informed,  the  results  reached.  This  report 
affirms  the  position  presented  by  the  Deputation.  “  It  is  only,”  it  main¬ 
tains,  “  as  the  salvation  of  lost  souls  is  kept  distinctly  and  prominently  in 
view,  as  the  single  all-absorbing  object,  that  these  missions  can  retain  the 
life  and  vigor  necessary  to  their  existence  and  success.”  And  in  what 
senseis  this  object  to  be  single  and  all-absorbing?  Why  to  the  exclu¬ 
sion,  as  will  appear  presently,  of  all  auxiliary  means  or  preparatory  pro¬ 
cesses  ;  as  the  one  object  always  to  be  aimed  at  directly  and  immediately. 
So  the  report  states  distinctly.  After  observing,  very  justly,  that  “this 
work  is  one  designed  to  make  a  large  demand  upon  faith,”  and  “  to  mani¬ 
fest  the  greatness  and  power  of  God  and  the  weakness  of  man,”  that  we 
must  depend  upon  the  Divine  Spirit,  feel  our  own  littleness,  &c.,  it  pro¬ 
ceeds  thus :  “  Th  is  work  acknowledges  no  necessity  of  any  auxiliary  means 
or  preparatory  process.  Not  only  the  men  of  the  world,  but  often  the  de¬ 
voted,  self-denying  missionary,  whose  sole  object  is  the  conversion  of 
souls,  is  so  repulsed  by  the  degradation  and  debasement  of  those  for  whom 
he  labors,  and  so  defeated  in  all  his  efforts  to  get  a  hearing  for  the  truth 
in  a  mind  pre-occupied  by  all  that  is  false,  vile  and  blasphemous,  that  he 
feels  the  necessity  of  some  preparatory  work  to  lit  the  mind  for  the  recep¬ 
tion  of  the  truth.  This  has  given  rise  to  the  various  plans  of  education 
and  civilization  which  have  sometimes  been  brought  forward  with  con¬ 
siderable  prominence.  And  there  is  an  appearance  of  reasonableness  in 
the  plea  that  the  young  mind  should  be  pre-occupied  with  the  seeds  of 
truth,  and  the  public  mind  elevated  by  diffusion  of  the  light  of  science  and 
the  elevating  and  refining  influences  of  civilization.  But  whether  we  look 
at  the  terms  of  our  commission,  or  to  the  example  of  Him  who  gave  it,  or 
of  those  who  first  received  and  acted  upon  it,  or  at  the  work  as  one  of 
faith  and  a  work  of  God,  we  find  no  authority  for  these  auxiliary  means, 
or  for  any  preparatory  process.”  Here  we  perceive  a  very  singular  con¬ 
founding  of  things  that  differ.  We  are  little  disposed  to  defend  those,  if 
any  such  there  be,  who  have  hoped  to  accomplish  the  work  of  missions  by 
plans  of  civilization,  or  as  it  is  again  expressed,  “by  the  diffusion  of  the 
light  of  science  and  the  elevating  and  refining  influences  of  civilization.” 
These,  we  apprehend,  none  of  our  own  missionaries  have  ever  made  more 
than  subordinate  and  incidental  objects.  But  what  propriety  is  there  in 
classing  with  these,  in  the  same  sentence,  the  preparatory  work  designed 
“  to  fit  the  mind  for  the  reception  of  the  truth,”  the  pre-occupying  of  “  the 
young  mind  with  the  seeds  of  truth”  and  education,  without  distinction  of 
kind,  even  though  it  be  carried  forward  on  the  basis,  and  with  the  most 
constant  use  of  the  Word  of  God?  This  latter  method  of  preparation,  we 
confidently  affirm,  is  not  against  the  terms  of  our  commission,  not  against 

4 


50 


Appendix. 


the  example  of  Him  who  gave  it,  nor  inconsistent  with  the  nature  of  the 
work  itself,  as  a  work  of  faith  and  a  work  of  God.  These  preparations, 
properly  used,  are  among  the  legitimate  means  of  grace.  All  our  churches 
at  home  so  regard  them,  and  so  use  them  ;  and  all  experience  is  in  favor 
of  their  utility.  As  to  the  Divine  example,  we  cannot  overlook  the  fact 
that  God  did  pursue  preparatory  processes  through  a  period  of  five  thou¬ 
sand  years,  before  He  offered  the  benefits  of  a  completed  gospel  to  a  single 
heathen  nation.  We  must  think,  therefore,  that  the  assertion  is  altogether 
too  sweeping  to  be  true,  that  “we  find  no  authority  for  these  auxiliary 
means,  nor  for  any  preparatory  process.” 

But  if  the  assertion  itself  is  strange  and  unwarrantable,  what  shall  we 
say  of  the  reasoning  employed  to  support  it?  “We  cannot  fora  mo¬ 
ment,”  says  the  report,  “  defend  the  position  that  God  is  at  all  dependent 
upon  human  instrumentality  for  the  salvation  of  the  world.”  “  In  this 
view  of  the  subject  we  must  admit,  that  it  is  as  easy  for  the  Divine  Spirit 
to  clear  away  the  rubbish  of  false  opinions  and  heathen  superstitions,  as 
to  renew  the  mind  not  thus  pre-occupied.  Even  though  these  notions  and 
superstitions  may  have  become  incorporated  with  the  daily  life,  and  are 
a  part  and  parcel  of  the  very  language  of  a  people,  we  cannot  limit  the 
power  of  the  Divine  Spirit.  And  we  believe  all  will  admit  that  such  views 
of  God  and  heaven,  of  sin  and  salvation,  as  the  Spirit  alone  can  give ,  are 
better  than  any  that  can  be  given  by  any  preparatory  process  of  teach¬ 
ing.”  A  very  singular  specimen  of  reasoning  certainly  is  this.  We  were 
hardly  prepared  to  meet  it  under  the  sanction  of  men  of  known  wisdom 
and  theological  education.  Truly,  we  cannot  limit  the  Spirit  of  God. 
But  has  lie  not  limited  Himself,  as  to  His  ordinary  methods?  Does  He 
not  choose  to  sanctify  men  through  the  truth  ?  And  does  He,  in  ordinary 
cases,  convey  that  truth  to  men’s  minds  by  His  own  direct  agency,  inde¬ 
pendently  of  the  outward  word  and  the  human  instrument?  Is  preach¬ 
ing,  which  the  report  insists  ought  to  be  used,  a  sort  of  magical  process, 
in  connection  with  which  the  Spirit  works,  irrespective  of  the  ordinary 
laws  of  the  human  mind?  Is  nothing  required  of  us  but  to  preach  the 
word,  no  matter  whether  men’s  minds  are  in  a  condition  to  understand  it 
or  not?  And  will  the  Spirit  do  all  the  rest,  making  the  unintelligible 
sound  a  means  of  conversion  ?  We  can  hardly  believe  the  authors  of  the 
paragraph  above  quoted,  would  go  this  length.  And  yet,  such  is  but  the 
legitimate  application  of  their  own  reasoning.  And  this  is  what  they 
would  have  us  understand,  by  regarding  the  work  as  “  a  work  of  faith  and 
a  Avork  of  God.”  Rather  would  we  denominate  it,  when  thus  presented, 
a  work  of  presumption,  and  a  work  dispensing  with  the  plainest  princi¬ 
ples  of  the  oracles  of  God. 

But  we  have  not  reached  the  end  of  the  matter  yet.  As  if  this  was  not 
sufficiently  thorough  work,  the  report  goes  on  to  say  further,  “  This  work 
not  only  acknowledges  no  necessity  of  any  auxiliary  means  or  prepara¬ 
tory  process  ;  but  is  actually  retarded  by  any  such  appliances.”  Any  attempt 
to  pre-occupy  the  young  mind  with  the  seeds  of  truth,  “  any  preparatory 
work”  designed  to  fit  the  mind  for  the  reception  of  truth,  “any  plans  of 
education”  with  a  vieAV  to  future  results,  is  not  only  of  no  advantage,  but 
actually  retards  the  accomplishment  of  the  single  and  immediate  object  of 
the  missionary  work ! 

Let  us  look  at  some  of  the  reasons  for  this  singular  assertion.  First,  it 
is  said,  “  there  is  danger  that  the  means  thus  used  become  in  themselves 
an  end.”  But  we  ask,  is  not  this  the  case  Avith  all  the  means  of  grace  ? 
And  are  all  means  then  to  be  shunned  in  our  efforts  to  propagate  the 
gospel ;  or  should  wo  not  rather  use  them,  guarding  sedulously  against  the 
abuse?  Secondly,  the  report  proceeds  ;  “Even  when  these  appliances  keep 


9 


51 


Appendix. 

their  place  simply  as  means,  there  is  danger  of  our  trusting  in  them  to  such 
an  extent  as  to  prevent  the  exercise  of  that  faith  in  the  Divine  power  so 
necessary  to  the  successful  prosecution  of  the  work.”  And  here  we  make 
the  same  reply  as  before.  There  is  no  more  danger  in  the  use  of  Chris¬ 
tian  education,  than  in  any  other  means.  There  is  no  more  danger  in 
the  endeavor  to  pre-occupy  the  young  mind  with  the  seeds  of  truth,  than 
in  laboring  in  any  way  ever  employed  by  man,  for  even  the  immediate 
conversion  of  the  soul.  Thirdly,  “  The  introduction  of  those  means  tends 
to  turn  the  attention  of  the  missionary  to  the  elevation  of  the  masses,  by 
bringing  them  in  contact  with  elevating  influences,  instead  of  laboring 
directly  for  the  conversion  of  individual  souls.”  We  see  not  how  the 
method  referred  to  tends  to  the  former  result,  instead  of  the  latter. 
Rather  we  should  suppose,  in  the  hands  of  a  devout  Christian  missionary 
it  would  tend  to  the  former,  as  far  as  it  tended  to  it  at  all,  for  the  sake,  of 
the  latter.  The  leavening  of  the  masses  in  a  community  with  Christian 
sentiments  and  Christian  knowledge,  we  have  been  accustomed  to  regard 
as  a  most  useful  auxilliary  to  the  ultimate  conversion  of  the  largest  num¬ 
ber  of  souls  in  that  community,  in  a  continued  series  of  gracious  harvests 
to  be  gathered  in  from  generation  to  generation.  It  is  this  which  makes 
the  work  of  the  gospel  in  a  Christian  land,  more  hopeful  than  among 
pagans  and  barbarians.  But  the  report  proceeds  :  “  Intimately  connected 
with  this,  is  the  tendency  to  limit,  in  effect,  the  power  of  God,  by  putting 
off  to  a  distant  period  the  salvation  of  these  masses,  instead  of  laboring  in 
hope  and  expectation  of  immediate  results.”  The  reasoning  if  we  under¬ 
stand  it  is  this.  To  labor  for  remote  results,  is  to  hinder  the  successful 
effort  for  immediate  results.  But  immediate  results  must  always  be  in¬ 
sisted  on  as  the  only  token  of  success.  Therefore,  whatsoever  has  in  view 
results  to  be  brought  about  at  some  future  day,  is  to  be  condemned  and 
avoided.  And  is  it  so  ?  Is  this  reasoning  sound  ?  Must  the  Christian 
pastor  abandon  all  processes  of  preparatory  or  auxiliary  training  ;  must 
he  make  no  effort  to  indoctrinate  his  people  yet  unconverted  ;  must  he 
take  no  means  to  bring  the  children  into  the  Sabbath-school,  or  soften  the 
prejudices  of  hostile  parents,  so  that  they  may  interpose  no  obstacle  to 
their  coming  into  the  Sabbath  school ;  is  the  teaching  of  Christian 
hymns,  catechisms,  and  portions  of  the  sacred  word  to  be  abandoned,  not 
only  as  having  no  tendency  to  secure  ultimately  their  conversion  and  sal¬ 
vation,  but  even  as  a  hindrance  to  it,  because  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten, 
those  whom  we  thus  instruct  are  not  converted  immediately?  Certainly 
we  have  not  so  read  the  history  of  the  Church,  or  the  instructions  and  ex¬ 
amples  of  the  sacred  oracles.  What  Christian  pastor  does  not  know,  that 
the  sowing  of  to-day  often  springs  up  and  bears  a  crop  years  afterwards  ; 
yea,  that  “  one  soweth  and  another  reapeth,” — one  labors,  and  another, 
years  afterwards,  perhaps  after  he  is  in  the  grave,  enters  into  his  labors? 
And  why  should  the  missionary  insist  always  and  exclusively,  upon  im¬ 
mediate  results  ?  Why  should  he  be  taught  to  reckon  his  success  exactly 
according  to  the  number  of  converts  actually  made  under  his  ministry  ? 

The  three  next  following  reasons  have  reference,  obviously,  to  processes 
of  a  more  secular  character  ;  processes  of  civilization  and  improvement  in 
arts  and  sciences,  social  habits,  &c.  Yet  even  here  we  think  the  censure 
is  quite  too  sweeping.  It  is  said  firstly,  “  This  course  perverts  the  Divine 
order  of  things,  by  introducing  prematurely  those  things  which  are  the 
results  of  Cristianity,  and  are  designed  to  followr  and  be  controlled  by 
Christian  principle.  It  has  been  remarked,  that  ‘  probably  the  reason 
why  the  recent  discoveries  in  art  and  sciences  were  kept  hidden  so  long 
was  because  the  world  was  not  good  enough  to  render  it  safe  to  give  such 
power  to  man.’  And  it  is  worthy  of  notice,  that  this  mighty  power  has 


9 


52 


Appendix. 


come  as  a  result  of  the  progress  of  Christianity,  and  is  directed  and  con¬ 
trolled  by  Christian  principle,  acting  upon  the  public  sentiment  of  Chris¬ 
tian  nations,  to  an  extent  which  cannot  but  lead  us  to  acknowledge  a 
Divine  providence.”  There  seems  to  us  a  strange  overlooking  of  obvious 
facts  in  these  statements.  Has  God  never  given  to  heathen  people  those 
arts  of  civilization  in  which  are  involved  the  elements  of  power  ?  Did  he 
withhold  them  from  the  Roman  Empire  ?  And  even  in  our  own  day,  are 
the  modern  discoveries  which  have  been  made  within  the  boundaries  of 
Christendom,  confined  to  those  nations,  or  those  parts  of  the  population  of 
nations,  which  are  under  the  controlling  influence  of  the  Christian  spirit? 
Witness  the  semi-Papal,  semi-infidel,  nation  of  France.  Is  the  electrie 
telegraph,  is  the  steam  engine,  is  the  press,  exclusively,  or  even  generally 
take  the  world  through,  “  directed  and  controlled  by  Christian  principle 
acting  upon  the  public  sentiment  of  Christian  nations?”  We  cannot 
think  this  opinion  will  be  persisted  in,  after  a  moment’s  reflection.  But 
look  at  the  conclusion  based  upon  these  erroneous  premises.  “  If  then, 
we  give  this  power  to  a  heathen  people  in  advance  of  the  Christian  prin¬ 
ciple  necessary  to  regulate  it,  we  pervert  the  order  of  nature,  and  set  in 
motion  powerful  influences  which  are  likely  to  work  against  us.”  We 
certainly  have  no  disposition  to  expend  much  missionary  strength,  in  or¬ 
dinary  cases,  in  efforts  for  mere  civilization.  And  yet  we  cannot  accept  this 
reasoning,  because,  if  admitted,  it  would  carry  us  quite  beyond  the 
bounds  of  Christian  discretion.  Shall  the  missionary  wish  to  exclude  the 
heathen  from  those  truths  which  may  serve  to  loosen  the  grasp  of  his  su¬ 
perstitions,  lest  in  giving  up  these,  he  should  become  an  infidel?  Shall  he 
avoid  whatever  may  elevate  the  habits  and  sentiments  of  the  brutal  savage 
or  rude  barbarian,  lest  that  elevation  should  give  him  an  advantage 
against  the  missionary  ?  We  think  not.  Those  improvements  in  civiliza¬ 
tion  and  the  arts  of  life,  which  are  the  proper  product  of  Christianity,  we 
believe  should  go  along  with  it,  wherever  it  goes ;  and  become  the  privi¬ 
lege,  and  if  possible,  the  accepted  privilege  of  each  community,  as  soon  as 
it  conies  in  contact  with  Christianity.  Do  we  deny  our  children  the 
benefits  of  education,  of  a  knowledge  of  the  arts  and  sciences,  of  secular 
literature,  of  the  refined  social  manners  peculiar  to  Christendom,  till  they 
become  converted?  Not  at  all.  Yet  the  argument  is  equally  conclusive 
here.  These  benefits,  in  their  best  forms,  are  the  “  results  of  Christianity 
If  then  this  power  is  given  to  an  unconverted  child  in  advance  of  the 
Christian  principle  necessary  to  control  and  regulate  it  we  pervert  the 
order  of  nature  and  set  in  motion  powerful  influences  which  are  likely  to 
work  against  us.  And  the  remark  that  follows  might  be  applied, 
mutatis  mutandis,  with  equal  force  to  communities  and  individuals  in 
Christendom,  as  to  those  in  pagan  lands.  “  Many  there  are  who  are 
so  far  elevated  and  enlightened  as  to  break  loose  from  the  supersti¬ 
tions  and  restraints  of  heathenism” — (substitute  for  this :  the  limita¬ 
tions  of  power  and  influence  that  belong  to  ignorance  and  rudeness) 
“  while  they  are  not  brought  under  the  influence  of  the  higher  restraints 
of  Christian  love  and  Christian  principle,  and  form  a  class  infidel  in 
religion  and  reckless  in  conduct.”  If  the  principle  is  applicable  to  the 
missionary,  it  is  applicable  also  to  the  Christian  pastor  at  home,  and  the 
Christian  parent ;  and  taken  in  its  full  breadth  would  sweep  away  a  large 
part  of  our  methods  of  training,  and  our  most  approved  institutions. 

The  last  reason  in  the  series,  viz.,  the  seventh,  reverts  to  the  still 
broader  ground  assumed  in  the  first  three.  “  There  is  danger,”  says  the 
report,  “  of  those  who  become  Christians,  becoming  so  from  conviction  of 
the  understanding,  instead  of  genuine  conversion  of  the  heart  by  the  in¬ 
fluences  of  the  Spirit :  and  as  their  faith  stands  in  the  wisdom  of  men,  in- 


» 


Appendix.  53 

'stead  of  the  power  of  God,  in  time  of  trouble  or  persecution  they  fall  away 
Well  aware  are  we  that  this  is  among  the  dangers  to  which  all  efforts  for 
men’s  salvation  are  liable.  We  have  to  guard  against  it  everywhere  in 
■Christian  lands,  and  we  have  no  doubt  missionaries  should  do  so  among 
the  heathen.  But  surely,  till  now,  we  had  never  learned  that  this  was 
any  reason  for  abstaining  from  processes  of  education,  and  from  endeavors 
to  preoccupy  the  young  mind  with  the  seeds  of  truth.  The  understanding 
we  have  always  supposed  to  be  our  only  avenue  to  the  heart.  And  what¬ 
ever  dangers  there  may  be,  lest  the  heart  should  not  be  affected  after  the 
understanding  is  convinced,  we  have  supposed  ourselves  shut  up  to  thi^ 
method,  of  endeavoring,  first  of  all,  to  convince  the  understanding  ;  while 
we  pray  always  that  the  power  of  the  Spirit  would  make  the  truth  lodged 
there  effectual  to  the  renewing  of  the  whole  inner  man. 

The  report  from  which  the  above  extracts  have  been  made,  is  the  pro¬ 
duct  of  one  of  the  younger  missionaries,  and  bears  the  traces  of  a  mind 
ardently  engaged  in  his  great  work,  and  disposed  to  rely  with  great  con¬ 
fidence  on  the  promised  power  of  the  Divine  Spirit.  And  could  we  re¬ 
ceive  it  only  as  such,  we  would  not  be  inclined  to  deal  with  it  in  any 
critical  way.  It  was.  doubtless,  written  in  a  somewhat  hasty  manner, 
and  adopted  by  the  Mission  after  a  long  discussion,  in  which  the  vast  im¬ 
portance  of  the  immediate  conversion  of  sinners  was  the  absorbing  topic. 
But  we  are  compelled  to  look  upon  it  under  a  different  aspect.  It  was 
elicited  in  answer  to  the  question  from  the  Prudential  Committee’s  Depu¬ 
tation,  already  recited.  It  bears  upon  the  whole  face  of  it  the  stamp  of 
their  leading  influence.  It  was  sanctioned  by  them,  in  explicit  terms, 
after  it  was  adopted  by  the  Mission.  It  was  intended  to  be  the  basis  of  a 
new  mission  policy,  which  was  materially  to  change  the  whole  procedure 
of  our  missions.  “  The  Board  and  its  patrons,”  says  the  Deputation, 
“  will  be  under  great  obligations  to  you  for  the  thoroughness  with  which 
you  have,  in  your  report,  discussed  the  governing  object  in  missions  to 
the  heathen.  It  was  our  first  subject  in  the  meeting,  and  effectively  con¬ 
nected  itself  with  all  that  followed.  The  first  great  principles  of  the  work 
are  there  embodied.  You  describe  it  in  impressive  language  as  a  work  of 
faith — God’s  work — acknowledging  no  necessity  of  auxiliary  means  or 
preparatory  process,  and  too  often  actually  retarded  by  a  resort  to  such 
appliances.”  It  did,  undoubtedly,  “  effectively  connect  itself  with  all  that 
followed.”  The  changes  which  were  made  in  what  the  Deputation  call 
“the  working  system,”  the  disbanding  of  the  Batticotta  Seminary,  the 
reduction  of  that  at  Oodooville,  the  abandonment  of  English  studies,  the 
erection  of  oral  preaching  into  an  almost  exclusive  instrumentality,  the 
confinement  of  teaching  in  schools  chiefly  to  converts  and  their  families, 
and  the  peculiar  ecclesiastical  system  which  we  considered  in  a  former 
number  of  this  paper,  all  grew  out  of  the  peculiar  views  adopted  on  this 
subject  of  the  governing  object. 

What  is  that  governing  object?  It  is  the  conversion  of  sinners- — the 
gathering  of  the  converts  into  churches,  ancl  the  putting  over  them  of  native 
pastors.  The  platform,  we  are  constrained  to  say,  is  altogether  too  nar¬ 
row  for  so  vast  and  complicated  a  work  as  the  salvation  of  a  lost  world 
through  the  gospel.  Objects  not  at  all  included  under  this,  are  to  Ire  kept 
in  view,  in  this  great  work.  The  sanctification  of  the  soul  is  hardly  less 
important  than  its  conversion.  Considered  in  its  relation  to  the  ultimate 
conversion  of  the  greatest  number,  it  may  for  the  present,- be  far  more-so. 
The  missionary  who  can  reckon,  to-day,  twenty  converts,  may  not  have 
done  as  great  a  work  as  he  who  has  prepared  one  burning  and  shining 
light  to  stand  for  a  generation  in  the  golden  candlestick.  To  aim  exclu¬ 
sively  at  immediate  conversions,  to  reckon  success  in  the  missionary  work 


54 


Appendix. 


by  the  number  of  such  conversions  actually  made,  is  to  incur  the  danger 
of  many  spurious  conversions.  It  is,  moreover,  to  defeat  the  very  object 
which  it  professes  to  aim  at.  Those  are  not,  ordinarily,  the  most  succes- 
ful  in  the  conversion  of  souls,  who  expect  to  do  the  work  by  a  stroke 
without  the  use  of  any  preparatory  means.  In  this,  as  in  all  other  opera¬ 
tions,  whether  in  the  natural  or  the  moral  world,  patient  and  far-reaching 
perseverance  accomplishes  far  more,  ordinarily,  than  momentary  efforts. 

The  governing  object  of  missions  is,  we  think,  like  that  of  all  other 
Christian  works,  the  glory  of  God.  The  next  subordinate  object, 
through  which  the  missionary  is  to  aim  at  this,  is  the  propagation  of  the 
gospel.  He  goes  forth  among  the  heathen  to  instruct  them  in,  and  by  the 
g  ace  of  God,  bring  them  into  the  way  of  salvation.  Even  if  none  should 
be  converted,  still  he  must  instruct  them  fully.  The  offer  is  to  be  made, 
even  though  he  could  know  that  the  individual  would  reject  it.  If  there 
are  obstacles  in  the  way  of  making  himself  understood,  he  is  to  endeavor 
by  every  wise  measure  to  remove  those  obstacles.  Preaching  is  not 
merely  the  utterance  of  a  set  of  sounds  :  it  is  the  conveying  of  knowledge. 
This  the  missionary  must  take  care  to  accomplish,  by  whatever  means  he 
finds  needful  for  tlie  end.  When  converts  are  made,  he  is  not  to  regard 
his  work  as  done.  To  gather  them  into  churches  and  put  native  pastors 
over  them,  is  not  enough,  unless  those  pastors  are  found  fully  competent 
to  their  complete  training  in  the  gospel.  By  “  warning  every  man  and 
teaching  every  man,”  he  must  endeavor  “to  present  every  man  perfect  in 
Christ  Jesus.”  Nor  is  he  to  content  himself  with  present  results.  Chris¬ 
tianity  must  he  made  if  possible,  to  take  a  deep  and  permanent  hold  on  the 
entire  community.  It  must  be  finally  rooted  among  the  people,  so  as  to 
live  and  grow  of  itself.  To  convert  if  it  were  practicable,  the  entire  pre¬ 
sent  population  of  India,  and  leave  them  just  there,  would  by  no  means  be 
the  accomplishment  of  an  entire  missionary  work.  They  might  be 
gathered  into  churches  and  have  native  pastors  over  them.  But  what 
then?  The  entire  work  might  not  last  beyond  the  present  generation. 
Witness  the  work  now  going  on  among  the  Armenians  and  other  nominal 
Christians,  where  the  Board  have  been  spending  for  many  years  their  best 
strength.  Is  there  no  need  of  guarding  against  a  similar  degeneracy 
among  the  new  churches  to  be  formed  now  among  pagan  people  ?  He  who 
labors  only  for  conversions,  may  perhaps  gather  so  many  souls,  more  or 
less  into  heaven  ;  and  that  is  doubtless  a  grand  result.  But  he  that  plants 
Christionity  as  a  permanent  power  in  a  community,  may,  when  the  final 
reckoning  comes,  find  tenfold  more  in  number,  as  well  as  brightness  of 
polish,  as  seals  of  his  ministry. 

It  is  for  these  reasons  and  others  that  might  be  named,  that  we  think 
the  governing  object  of  our  missionary  work  ought  to  he  a  broader  one  than 
that  which  is  assumed  as  such  by  the  Deputation.  We  yield  to  none  in  our 
conception  of  the  importance  of  genuine  conversions.  One  immortal  soul 
won  to  Christ,  and  so  saved,  is  worth  more  than  all  the  riches  and  splen¬ 
dor,  all  the  cultivation  and  refinement,  and  intellectual  exaltation  of  the 
most  cultivated  and  prosperous  nations.  But  even  this  object,  important 
as  it  is,  should  not  blind  us  to  the  fact  that  it  is  not  God’s  last  end  in 
giving  us  the  gospel ;  neither  should  it  be  ours.  Other  objects,  both  ac¬ 
cessory  and  ulterior  are  of  importance  too.  And  since  a  narrow  basis  leads 
to  a  narrow  superstructure,  we  hope  a  careful  revision  of  this  fundamen¬ 
tal  point  will  guard  our  future  work  against  that  cramped  and  precarious 
character  which  we  think  now  it  is  in  danger  of  assuming.  Broader  and 
more  far-reaching  aims  we  think  are  needful  to  put  in  operation  all  the 
array  of  means  offered  us  by  God’s  providence,  by  which  at  length  this 
whole  fallen  world  shall  be  filled  with  the  glory  of  God. 


. 

■> 


. 

’  .  1  . . 


. 

. 


’ 

i  .! 


•  <- 


. 


_ 


* 


vV 


?  V 


V 


M/ 


